We performed a comparison between Apache Pulsar and Cloudera DataFlow based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Confluent and others in Streaming Analytics."The solution operates as a classic message broker but also as a streaming platform."
"This solution is very scalable and robust."
"The initial setup was not so difficult"
"DataFlow's performance is okay."
"Documentation is poor because much of it is in Chinese with no English translation."
"Although their workflow is pretty neat, it still requires a lot of transformation coding; especially when it comes to Python and other demanding programming languages."
"It's an outdated legacy product that doesn't meet the needs of modern data analysts and scientists."
"It is not easy to use the R language. Though I don't know if it's possible, I believe it is possible, but it is not the best language for machine learning."
Apache Pulsar is ranked 12th in Streaming Analytics with 1 review while Cloudera DataFlow is ranked 13th in Streaming Analytics with 3 reviews. Apache Pulsar is rated 8.0, while Cloudera DataFlow is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Apache Pulsar writes "The solution can mimic other APIs without changing a line of code". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cloudera DataFlow writes "A scalable and robust platform for analyzing data". Apache Pulsar is most compared with Apache Flink, Apache Spark Streaming, Amazon Kinesis, Amazon MSK and Azure Stream Analytics, whereas Cloudera DataFlow is most compared with Databricks, Confluent, Amazon MSK, Spring Cloud Data Flow and Informatica Data Engineering Streaming.
See our list of best Streaming Analytics vendors.
We monitor all Streaming Analytics 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.