We performed a comparison between Confluent and IBM InfoSphere DataStage based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Streaming Analytics solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent. The other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and tools."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"The ETL tools are probably the most valuable feature. It has an IBM tool, a friendly UI and it makes things more comfortable."
"It's a robust solution."
"ETL is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the data integration for data warehousing."
"The most valuable feature is the product's versatility to inject data."
"The most valuable feature for our data processing needs is IBM InfoSphere DataStage's capability to handle ETL tasks with large record volumes."
"It is quite useful and powerful."
"We are mostly using transmission rules. It has a lot of functions and logic related to transmission. It is a user-friendly tool with in-built functions."
"Currently, in the early stages, I see a gap on the security side. If you are using the SaaS version, we would like to get a fuller, more secure solution that can be adopted right out of the box. Confluence could do a better job sharing best practices or a reusable pattern that others have used, especially for companies that can not afford to hire professional services from Confluent."
"The Schema Registry service could be improved. I would like a bigger knowledge base of other use cases and more technical forums. It would be good to have more flexible monitoring features added to the next release as well."
"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"In terms of intermediate storage, we have some challenges, especially with customers who store data in intermediate locations."
"The setup is extremely difficult."
"We would be happy to see in next versions the ability to return several parameters from jobs. Now, jobs can return just one parameter. If they could return several parameters, that would be great."
"It would be great if they can include some basic version of data quality checking features."
"Its documentation is not up to the mark. While building APIs, we had a lot of problems trying to get around it because it is not very user-friendly. We tried to get hold of API documentation, but the documentation is not very well thought out. It should be more structured and elaborate. In terms of additional features, I would like to see good reporting on performance and performance-tuning recommendations that can be based on AI. I would also like to see better data profiling information being reported on InfoSphere."
"In the future, I would like to see more integration with cloud technologies."
"The troubleshooting guide is very bad."
"It doesn't have any big data connections. It would be good to have them because most of the systems are moving towards big data. There should also be a user-friendly way to interact with the cloud. Its loading process is very slow. It takes a lot of time for around 5 or 6 million records, and we are not able to provide real-time data to the vendors due to this delay. Its performance needs to be improved. It is also like a legacy system. It is not updated much. In higher versions, they only do small changes. We would like to have new features and new technologies."
Confluent is ranked 3rd in Streaming Analytics with 19 reviews while IBM InfoSphere DataStage is ranked 7th in Data Integration with 37 reviews. Confluent is rated 8.4, while IBM InfoSphere DataStage is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM InfoSphere DataStage writes "User-friendly with a lot of functions for transmission rules, but has slow performance and not suitable for a huge volume of data". Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, AWS Glue and Oracle GoldenGate, whereas IBM InfoSphere DataStage is most compared with SSIS, IBM Cloud Pak for Data, Azure Data Factory, Talend Open Studio and Informatica PowerCenter. See our Confluent vs. IBM InfoSphere DataStage report.
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.
