No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Apache Flink vs Google Cloud Dataflow comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Flink
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud Dataflow
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Flink is 6.7%, down from 14.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Dataflow is 3.6%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Flink6.7%
Google Cloud Dataflow3.6%
Other89.7%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Sanjay Srivastava - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Architect at IBM
Streaming workflows have improved data integration and support real-time pipelines across platforms
We are not using Apache Flink in its advanced window capabilities. We are using the Apache Flink job in Apache SeaTunnel, meaning we can write the code inside Apache SeaTunnel. Currently, we are moving; both solutions are there. We are doing it on-premises with the help of Kubernetes and OpenShift. The main reason why Apache Flink is better is that it has more functions, and being open source with easy code in Apache SeaTunnel helps us achieve that. Cost is a major issue. I would rate the stability of the product as an eight. For Apache Flink, the final point can be rated an eight. I can recommend Apache Flink to other users for streaming support, and I am recommending it. I would rate this review an eight overall.
Mohammed Aaqibuddin - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Cdp Specialist at DigitasLBi
Unified user personas have improved data workflows and support detailed monitoring and logging
Google Cloud has many streams and products. In Google Cloud, everything is translated in the backend, so we do not have to use services such as Apache Beam. When you want to use Google Cloud Functions, you write the code, and the backend talks to all the libraries or Apache, so we do not need to be concerned about those. We just need to use our functions that translate and have many tools and services readily available. Google Cloud Dataflow has made it very easy for detailed monitoring and logging features for pipeline performance assessment. For example, if I am using Google Cloud Functions, I can easily see what changes I have done and trace it properly. I can see what is happening with this script, how many users are affected, whether the script is working, what is failing, and how we can rectify issues with proper monitoring.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Apache Flink provides faster and low-cost investment for me; I find it to have low hardware requirements, and it's faster with low code, meaning it's easy to understand for moving the streaming data."
"Apache Flink is meant for low latency applications. You take one event opposite if you want to maintain a certain state. When another event comes and you want to associate those events together, in-memory state management was a key feature for us."
"The main advantage is the turnaround time, which has been reduced drastically because of Apache Flink, and now everything is in almost real time with no waiting or lag of data in the application while machine resources are utilized much more efficiently."
"With Flink, it provides out-of-the-box checkpointing and state management. It helps us in that way. When Storm used to restart, sometimes we would lose messages. With Flink, it provides guaranteed message processing, which helped us. It also helped us with maintenance or restarts."
"It provides us the flexibility to deploy it on any cluster without being constrained by cloud-based limitations."
"Allows us to process batch data, stream to real-time and build pipelines."
"The documentation is very good."
"Another feature is how Flink handles its radiuses. It has something called the checkpointing concept. You're dealing with billions and billions of requests, so your system is going to fail in large storage systems. Flink handles this by using the concept of checkpointing and savepointing, where they write the aggregated state into some separate storage. So in case of failure, you can basically recall from that state and come back."
"The most valuable features of Google Cloud Dataflow are the integration, it's very simple if you have the complete stack, which we are using. It is overall very easy to use, user-friendly friendly, and cost-effective if you know how to use it. The solution is very flexible for programmers, if you know how to do scripts or program in Python or any other language, it's extremely easy to use."
"Migrating our batch processing jobs to Google Cloud Dataflow led to a reduction in cost by 70%."
"The service is relatively cheap compared to other batch-processing engines."
"The integration within Google Cloud Platform is very good."
"I don't need a server running all the time while using the tool. It is also easy to setup. The product offers a pay-as-you-go service."
"The most valuable features of Google Cloud Dataflow are scalability and connectivity."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Google Cloud Dataflow is useful for streaming and data pipelines."
 

Cons

"The state maintains checkpoints and they use RocksDB or S3. They are good but sometimes the performance is affected when you use RocksDB for checkpointing."
"There are more libraries that are missing and also maybe more capabilities for machine learning."
"We have a machine learning team that works with Python, but Apache Flink does not have full support for the language."
"The TimeWindow feature is a bit tricky. The timing of the content and the windowing is a bit changed in 1.11. They have introduced watermarks. A watermark is basically associating every data with a timestamp. The timestamp could be anything, and we can provide the timestamp. So, whenever I receive a tweet, I can actually assign a timestamp, like what time did I get that tweet. The watermark helps us to uniquely identify the data. Watermarks are tricky if you use multiple events in the pipeline. For example, you have three resources from different locations, and you want to combine all those inputs and also perform some kind of logic. When you have more than one input screen and you want to collect all the information together, you have to apply TimeWindow all. That means that all the events from the upstream or from the up sources should be in that TimeWindow, and they were coming back. Internally, it is a batch of events that may be getting collected every five minutes or whatever timing is given. Sometimes, the use case for TimeWindow is a bit tricky. It depends on the application as well as on how people have given this TimeWindow. This kind of documentation is not updated. Even the test case documentation is a bit wrong. It doesn't work. Flink has updated the version of Apache Flink, but they have not updated the testing documentation. Therefore, I have to manually understand it. We have also been exploring failure handling. I was looking into changelogs for which they have posted the future plans and what are they going to deliver. We have two concerns regarding this, which have been noted down. I hope in the future that they will provide this functionality. Integration of Apache Flink with other metric services or failure handling data tools needs some kind of update or its in-depth knowledge is required in the documentation. We have a use case where we want to actually analyze or get analytics about how much data we process and how many failures we have. For that, we need to use Tomcat, which is an analytics tool for implementing counters. We can manage reports in the analyzer. This kind of integration is pretty much straightforward. They say that people must be well familiar with all the things before using this type of integration. They have given this complete file, which you can update, but it took some time. There is a learning curve with it, which consumed a lot of time. It is evolving to a newer version, but the documentation is not demonstrating that update. The documentation is not well incorporated. Hopefully, these things will get resolved now that they are implementing it. Failure is another area where it is a bit rigid or not that flexible. We never use this for scaling because complexity is very high in case of a failure. Processing and providing the scaled data back to Apache Flink is a bit challenging. They have this concept of offsetting, which could be simplified."
"There is room for improvement in the initial setup process."
"There is a learning curve. It takes time to learn."
"In a future release, they could improve on making the error descriptions more clear."
"Failure is another area where it is a bit rigid or not that flexible."
"The deployment time could also be reduced."
"Google Cloud Data Flow can improve by having full simple integration with Kafka topics. It's not that complicated, but it could improve a bit. The UI is easy to use but the experience could be better. There are other tools available that do a better job."
"The technical support is very hard to reach."
"They should do a market survey and then make improvements."
"The solution's setup process could be more accessible."
"The system could function in an automated fashion and provide suggestions based on past transactions to achieve better scalability."
"I would like to see improvements in consistency and flexibility for schema design for NoSQL data stored in wide columns."
"Currently, not all error logs are available to users and this could make debugging failed jobs very difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is open-source, which is free."
"This is an open-source platform that can be used free of charge."
"It's an open-source solution."
"Apache Flink is open source so we pay no licensing for the use of the software."
"It's an open source."
"The tool is cheap."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."
"Google Cloud Dataflow is a cheap solution."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"The price of the solution depends on many factors, such as how they pay for tools in the company and its size."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate Google Cloud Dataflow's pricing a four out of ten."
"Google Cloud is slightly cheaper than AWS."
"The solution is not very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Retailer
15%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Apache Flink?
Apache could improve Apache Flink by providing more functionality, as they need to fully support data integration. The connectors are still very few for Apache Flink. There is a lack of functionali...
What is your primary use case for Apache Flink?
I am working with Apache Flink, which is the tool we use for data integration. Apache Flink is for data, and we are working on the data integration project, not big data, using Apache Flink and Apa...
What advice do you have for others considering Apache Flink?
We are not using Apache Flink in its advanced window capabilities. We are using the Apache Flink job in Apache SeaTunnel, meaning we can write the code inside Apache SeaTunnel. Currently, we are mo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud Dataflow?
Pricing is normal. It is part of a package received from Google, and they are not charging us too high.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud Dataflow?
I feel there could be something that they can introduce, such as when we have data in the tables, a feature that creates a unique persona of the user automatically, so we do not have to do that man...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Dataflow?
The primary use case for Google Cloud Dataflow is when a brand has a lot of data and wants to store it in their warehouse. They can use BigQuery to store their data or use big data solutions to sto...
 

Also Known As

Flink
Google Dataflow
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

LogRhythm, Inc., Inter-American Development Bank, Scientific Technologies Corporation, LotLinx, Inc., Benevity, Inc.
Absolutdata, Backflip Studios, Bluecore, Claritics, Crystalloids, Energyworx, GenieConnect, Leanplum, Nomanini, Redbus, Streak, TabTale
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Flink vs. Google Cloud Dataflow and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.