We performed a comparison between IBM Netezza Performance Server and LocalDB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Snowflake Computing, Oracle, Teradata and others in Data Warehouse."The most valuable features of the IBM Netezza Performance Server are the NPS server because of the reduced maintenance and overall good performance."
"The data governance prospect... from what I've seen, that is a really powerful tool as well, to help with data lineage and keeping track of that."
"The benefit is really because of the additional speed that we have and, truth be told, the more updated ETL processes and the revamped scheduler in general."
"IBM Netezza Performance Server is a cost-effective solution."
"The underlying hardware that IBM provides with this appliance is made for a specific purpose, to serve performance on a large amount of data, and to do analytics as well. It is faster, when you compare it to any other product."
"The most valuable feature would be the fact that it has been running for awhile in an appliance format."
"The performance is most important to me, and it helps our ability to make business decisions quickly."
"We are able to execute very complex queries. Over 90 percent of our query executions are one second or less. We do millions of queries everyday."
"The initial setup was simple."
"The most valuable feature of LocalDBis the connection between the application and DB."
"The solution is fast."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The guidelines are very easy to follow. Maintenance is very easy and requires very little manpower."
"The scalability is not as expected. The capacity in the black box is not enough."
"Our main problem with it is concurrency. When there are too many users running Netezza at the same time, this is when we have the most complaints."
"Oracle Exadata's security features, like TDE encryption, are missing in IBM Netezza Performance Server."
"IBM Netezza Performance Server could improve its interface, support for big data, and APA-based connectivity should be available."
"LIke Teradata, we can’t add a node/SPU to the existing appliance."
"In terms of features that I would like to see, one is the ability to actually scale out an architecture. Right now, if you buy one, it's fixed. There is no scale-up availability at all."
"Concurrency limit needs to be increased somewhat."
"The only issue is that it's not expandable."
"The ALM features can be improved, but the database by itself is reliable."
"The initial setup is complex and requires a skilled person."
"The internal connection features of LocalDB could improve."
"The solution needs to create a management tool. Right now, the solution has tools for creating a local installation, but it's too simplistic. We need something that's a bit more complex so that we can extend the tools with our scripts."
More IBM Netezza Performance Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Netezza Performance Server is ranked 10th in Data Warehouse with 33 reviews while LocalDB is ranked 15th in Relational Databases Tools with 5 reviews. IBM Netezza Performance Server is rated 8.0, while LocalDB is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of IBM Netezza Performance Server writes "A cost-effective data warehousing tool, but security features like TDE encryption are missing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of LocalDB writes "Good for the development process, generally stable, and easy to set up". IBM Netezza Performance Server is most compared with Oracle Exadata, Oracle Database, Snowflake, Teradata and SQL Server, whereas LocalDB is most compared with SQL Server, MySQL, Oracle Database In-Memory, Oracle Database and Infobright DB.
We monitor all 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.
