We performed a comparison between Apache NiFi and Zadara based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Compute Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The user interface is good and makes it easy to design very popular workflows."
"The initial setup is very easy. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one point is difficult, and ten points are easy."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"The most valuable features of this solution are ease of use and implementation."
"We can integrate the tool with other applications easily."
"It's an automated flow, where you can build a flow from source to destination, then do the transformation in between."
"Visually, this is a good product."
"The most valuable feature has been the range of clients and the range of connectors that we could use."
"The most valuable features of Zadara are its visibility and simplicity to use."
"A nice feature is the immutable object storage, which can be used in conjunction with Veeam."
"It's very easy to expand and compared to other storage systems that we've used, it's a lot more expandable and a lot more flexible in how it's deployed."
"The most valuable feature of Zadara is its ease of use and safety. Overall the solution is a complete package, it has all the features needed."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility in terms of deployment options."
"Zadara Storage Cloud having 24/7 management saves me support and engineering costs because the storage and computing are managed by a third-party. We are able to focus more attention on the customer, which is truly our core business. Even at 1:00 AM or 2:00 AM at night, someone will answer, which is important."
"One of the most valuable features is its integration with other cloud solutions. We have a presence within Amazon EC2 and we leverage compute instances in there. Being able to integrate with compute, both locally within Zadara, as well as with other cloud vendors such as Amazon, is very helpful, while also being able to maintain extremely low latency between those connections."
"Being able to scale on demand, and being able to get out of our security operation center, and not having to purchase hardware upfront, has drastically reduced the overhead that was required to maintain our information. We have also gained additional capabilities in terms of speed of replicating that information."
"The use case templates could be more precise to typical business needs."
"There are some claims that NiFi is cloud-native but we have tested it, and it's not."
"I think the UI interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"More features must be added to the product."
"There should be a better way to integrate a development environment with local tools."
"There is room for improvement in integration with SSO. For example, NiFi does not have any integration with SSO. And if I want to give some kind of rollback access control across the organization. That is not possible."
"The overall stability of this solution could be improved. In a future release, we would like to have access to more features that could be used in a parallel way. This would provide more freedom with processing."
"We run many jobs, and there are already large tables. When we do not control NiFi on time, all reports fail for the day. So it's pretty slow to control, and it has to be improved."
"I would like to see them be a little bit more proactive in terms of the patches and updates that are available. I would like to see more disclosure and information around what fixes or what enhancements are available within a patch, and help in coordinating and scheduling that. Right now, it's driven more by the customer in reaching out via a support ticket."
"There are still some storage features that they lack. For example, other vendors implemented the auto-tiering feature a long time ago, while Zadara Storage Cloud is just coming out with this feature today. So, they are a little bit late compared to the market."
"The initial setup of the solution is complex."
"The range of support of VMware could be better. It can support Windows, however, it cannot support other operating systems like IBM AIX. This needs to improve."
"Some of the features are a little bit slow to come to market."
"Cost-wise, because it's a pay-per-use model, it may ultimately end up costing us more in the long run than something we developed ourselves."
"The management interface is more geared towards end-users rather than a service partner like ourselves, and there are improvements that can be made around that."
"Having iSCSI over the internet using a VPN, the IPSec tunnel is really the only thing that I find missing from this product."
Apache NiFi is ranked 8th in Compute Service with 10 reviews while Zadara is ranked 9th in Compute Service with 9 reviews. Apache NiFi is rated 7.8, while Zadara is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Apache NiFi writes "Allows the creation and use of custom functions to achieve desired functionality but limitation in handling monthly transactions due to a lack of partitioning for dates". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zadara writes "We're able to scale up or down almost instantly, and changes are handled efficiently by their managed services team ". Apache NiFi is most compared with Google Cloud Dataflow, AWS Lambda, Apache Spark, Azure Stream Analytics and Apache Storm, whereas Zadara is most compared with MinIO, Amazon S3, Nutanix Cloud Infrastructure (NCI), Wasabi and Red Hat Ceph Storage. See our Apache NiFi vs. Zadara report.
See our list of best Compute Service vendors.
We monitor all Compute Service 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.
