We performed a comparison between IBM InfoSphere DataStage and IBM InfoSphere Information Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has improved the time it takes to perform tasks related to batch applications."
"I am impressed with the tool's ETL tracing."
"Highly customizable: Allowing you to handle multiple data latencies (scheduled batch, on-demand, and real-time) in the same job."
"As a data integration platform, it is easy to use. It is quite robust and useful for volumetric analysis when you have huge volumes of data. We have tested it for up to ten million rows, and it is robust enough to process ten million rows internally with its parallel processing. Its error logging mechanism is far simpler and easier to understand than other data integration tools. The newer version of InfoSphere has the data catalog and IDC lineage. They are helpful in the easy traceability of columns and tables."
"We like the flexibility of modeling."
"The Hierarchical Data Stage is good."
"The concept of integration is a valuable feature of the product."
"It's a robust solution."
"IBM InfoSphere Information Server is stable."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The integration with different technologies is the most valuable feature."
"This solution is extremely flexible and scalable."
"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."
"The error messaging needs to be improved."
"The interface needs improvement. It is really too technical. That is the main problem."
"The setup is extremely difficult."
"It takes a lot of time to actually trigger your job and then go into the logs and other stuff. So all of this is really time-consuming."
"The graphical user interface (GUI) feels a lot like the interfaces from the 1980s."
"The initial setup can be complex."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"This solution would benefit from the engine being made more lightweight."
"There are certain shortcomings in the cloud side of the solution, where improvements are required."
"IBM InfoSphere Information Server should be more scalable. It should have the option to change the configuration to run on a single, non-multiple node, or multi-threading processing."
"Their technical support needs improvement."
More IBM InfoSphere Information Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM InfoSphere DataStage is ranked 7th in Data Integration with 36 reviews while IBM InfoSphere Information Server is ranked 34th in Data Integration with 7 reviews. IBM InfoSphere DataStage is rated 7.8, while IBM InfoSphere Information Server is rated 8.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM InfoSphere Information Server writes "Prompt support, reliable, but lacking scalability". IBM InfoSphere DataStage is most compared with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, SSIS, Azure Data Factory, Talend Open Studio and AWS Glue, whereas IBM InfoSphere Information Server is most compared with Qlik Replicate, IBM Watson Knowledge Catalog, IBM Cloud Pak for Data, Oracle GoldenGate and IBM InfoSphere Information Governance Catalog. See our IBM InfoSphere DataStage vs. IBM InfoSphere Information Server report.
See our list of best Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.