If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering Microsoft Parallel Data Warehouse, what would you say?
How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?
We have had a good experience working with this tool. If you don't have a problem with memory and have good processors, then you won't have an issue. However, depending on your needs, you may want to go check out other tools. I would rate the tool as an eight out of 10.
I am not comfortable with the Microsoft Parallel Data Warehouse at the moment. I would rate this solution a six out of ten.
We use the on-premises deployment model. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
This is a solution that has good performance and I recommend it. The support from Microsoft is also another thing that makes the Parallel Data Warehouse a good option. The biggest lesson that we have learned from using this solution is that customers are most interested in a quick project turnaround time, which is something that Parallel Data Warehouse provides. This is a good solution but there is always room for improvement. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.
My advice for anybody who is implementing Microsoft Parallel Data Warehouse is to be aware of how big the data is. You have to be sure of how to secure and take care of the data. You have to think about scalability. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.
My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is not to overload your server with all of the data that you don't use on a day-to-day basis. It is very easy to pull the data that you need whenever it is required. You will have to decide how to store the data and how easy it is for your client to send new data. Neither of these things should be difficult to do, even for newcomers to SQL. Sometimes, you will have to have a senior person demonstrate something basic, like how to pull data, and then people usually pick it up. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to design the databases as well as they can because it is difficult to make changes in the future. It is also important to have a time field in your data in case you want to use it in the future as a reference. This is a good solution but all software can be improved and made better. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
On a scale from one to 10, I rate this solution a nine. In the future I would love to see a slightly better automation engine, just for the data integration layer, to make it slightly easier for end-users or junior developers to get involved in incremental updating. The biggest part that we battle with in terms of costing, and explaining to people why it takes so long to develop some of those things, is just to get the data into the actual data warehouse and automating that. It's purely an integration layer to actually get the data into the data warehouses. People need to do their research very well to understand the terminology and the technology when they speak to people that are technically inclined, because there's a lot of miscommunication in terms of what they expect from the program and what's delivered at the end of the day. The biggest lessons I've learned through the years are that Microsoft is probably the largest research company there is. So people should stick to people that know what they're doing, and Microsoft definitely has some very, very capable people designing these products. And that's probably why I've stayed with Microsoft so long. I've actually tried out a few other suppliers, but I always go back to Microsoft.