We performed a comparison between Amazon EMR and AWS Lake Formation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Warehouse solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is pretty simple to set up."
"The ability to resize the cluster is what really makes it stand out over other Hadoop and big data solutions."
"The solution helps us manage huge volumes of data."
"This is the best tool for hosts and it's really flexible and scalable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The project management is very streamlined."
"We are using applications, such as Splunk, Livy, Hadoop, and Spark. We are using all of these applications in Amazon EMR and they're helping us a lot."
"It has a variety of options and support systems."
"The solution is quite good at handling analytics. It's done a good job at helping us centralize them."
"It is seamlessly integrated within the AWS ecosystem, making it straightforward to manage access patterns for AWS-native services."
"The most important advantage in using AWS Lake Formation is its ability to connect the data lake to the other technologies in AWS. This is what I advise my clients."
"The solution has many features that are applicable to events such as audits."
"We use AWS Lake Formation typically for the data warehouse."
"The initial setup was time-consuming."
"Modules and strategies should be better handled and notified early in advance."
"The product's features for storing data in static clusters could be better."
"The problem for us is it starts very slow."
"The legacy versions of the solution are not supported in the new versions."
"We don't have much control. If we have multiple users, if they want to scale up, the cost will go and increase and we don't know how we can restrict that price part."
"As people are shifting from legacy solutions to other technologies, Amazon EMR needs to add more features that give more flexibility in managing user data."
"The most complicated thing is configuring to the cluster and ensure it's running correctly."
"The solution could make improvements around orchestration and doing some automation stuff on AWS front automation. It would be useful if we could use automation to build images and use hardened images which are CIS compliant."
"AWS Lake Formation's pricing could be cheaper."
"It falls short when it comes to more granular access control, such as cell-level or row-level entitlements which is a significant drawback for organizations that require precise control over who can access specific rows of data."
"For the end-users, it's not as user-friendly as it could be."
"In our experience what could be improved are not the support, performance or monitoring, but at a managerial level, the very expensive professional services of AWS. This could be an area of improvement for them. It's too expensive to acquire their support."
Amazon EMR is ranked 9th in Cloud Data Warehouse with 20 reviews while AWS Lake Formation is ranked 12th in Cloud Data Warehouse with 5 reviews. Amazon EMR is rated 7.8, while AWS Lake Formation is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Amazon EMR writes "Provides efficient data processing features and has good scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS Lake Formation writes "Strategically aligning data management in a multi-cloud environment with significant reporting challenges". Amazon EMR is most compared with Snowflake, Cloudera Distribution for Hadoop, Azure Data Factory, Amazon Redshift and SAP HANA, whereas AWS Lake Formation is most compared with Snowflake, Azure Data Factory, Amazon Redshift, Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics and Apache Hadoop. See our AWS Lake Formation vs. Amazon EMR report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Warehouse vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Warehouse reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
