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

Apache Spark vs Spark SQL comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Spark
Ranking in Hadoop
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
Compute Service (6th), Java Frameworks (2nd)
Spark SQL
Ranking in Hadoop
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Hadoop category, the mindshare of Apache Spark is 14.2%, down from 19.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Spark SQL is 5.1%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Hadoop Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Spark14.2%
Spark SQL5.1%
Other80.7%
Hadoop
 

Featured Reviews

Devindra Weerasooriya - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Architect at Devtech
Provides a consistent framework for building data integration and access solutions with reliable performance
The in-memory computation feature is certainly helpful for my processing tasks. It is helpful because while using structures that could be held in memory rather than stored during the period of computation, I go for the in-memory option, though there are limitations related to holding it in memory that need to be addressed, but I have a preference for in-memory computation. The solution is beneficial in that it provides a base-level long-held understanding of the framework that is not variant day by day, which is very helpful in my prototyping activity as an architect trying to assess Apache Spark, Great Expectations, and Vault-based solutions versus those proposed by clients like TIBCO or Informatica.
Kemal Duman - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead, Data Engineering at Nesine.com
Data pipelines have run faster and support flexible batch and streaming transformations
We do not have any performance problems, but we do have some resource problems. Spark SQL consumes so many resources that we migrated our streaming job from Spark to Apache Flink. Resource management in Spark SQL should be better. It consumes more resources, which is normal. The main reason we switched from Spark is memory and CPU consumption. The major reason is the resource problem because the number of streaming jobs has been increasing in our company. That is why we considered resource management as a priority. Because of the resource consumption, I would say the development of Spark SQL is better. For development purposes, it is a top product and not difficult to work with, but resources are the major problem. We changed to Flink regardless of development time. Development time is less in Spark compared with Flink.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is highly scalable, allowing you to efficiently work with extensive datasets that might be problematic to handle using traditional tools that are memory-constrained."
"One of Apache Spark's most valuable features is that it supports in-memory processing, the execution of jobs compared to traditional tools is very fast."
"The good performance. The nice graphical management console. The long list of ML algorithms."
"As it uses in-memory data processing, Spark is very fast."
"ETL and streaming capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Spark is its flexibility."
"The distribution of tasks, like the seamless map-reduce functionality, is quite impressive."
"The fault tolerant feature is provided."
"One of Spark SQL's most beautiful features is running parallel queries to go through enormous data."
"It is a stable solution."
"Data validation and ease of use are the most valuable features."
"The performance is one of the most important features, and it has an API to process the data in a functional manner."
"This solution is a much more scalable and adventurous solution."
"We use it to gather all the transaction data."
"The speed of getting data, as our TBs are big and it's a lot of data."
"The stability was fine. It behaved as expected."
 

Cons

"It's not easy to install."
"When using Spark, users may need to write their own parallelization logic, which requires additional effort and expertise."
"It would be beneficial to enhance Spark's capabilities by incorporating models that utilize features not traditionally present in its framework."
"The initial setup was not easy."
"Apache Spark lacks geospatial data."
"It requires overcoming a significant learning curve due to its robust and feature-rich nature."
"This solution currently cannot support or distribute neural network related models, or deep learning related algorithms. We would like this functionality to be developed."
"The main problem is, now in the market, there are not many people certified in Apache Spark."
"It would be beneficial for aggregate functions to include a code block or toolbox that explains its calculations or supported conditional statements."
"I've experienced some incompatibilities when using the Delta Lake format."
"There are many inconsistencies in syntax for the different querying tasks like selecting columns and joining between two tables so I'd like to see a more consistent syntax."
"In terms of improvement, the only thing that could be enhanced is the stability aspect of Spark SQL."
"It takes a bit of time to get used to using this solution versus Pandas as it has a steep learning curve."
"This solution could be improved by adding monitoring and integration for the EMR."
"Spark SQL consumes so many resources that we migrated our streaming job from Spark to Apache Flink."
"In the next update, we'd like to see better performance for small points of data. It is possible but there are better tools that are faster and cheaper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is quite expensive. In fact, it accounts for almost 50% of the cost of our entire project."
"Since we are using the Apache Spark version, not the data bricks version, it is an Apache license version, the support and resolution of the bug are actually late or delayed. The Apache license is free."
"Apache Spark is not too cheap. You have to pay for hardware and Cloudera licenses. Of course, there is a solution with open source without Cloudera."
"The product is expensive, considering the setup."
"It is an open-source platform. We do not pay for its subscription."
"The solution is affordable and there are no additional licensing costs."
"They provide an open-source license for the on-premise version."
"I did not pay anything when using the tool on cloud services, but I had to pay on the compute side. The tool is not expensive compared with the benefits it offers. I rate the price as an eight out of ten."
"We don't have to pay for licenses with this solution because we are working in a small market, and we rely on open-source because the budgets of projects are very small."
"We use the open-source version, so we do not have direct support from Apache."
"There is no license or subscription for this solution."
"The on-premise solution is quite expensive in terms of hardware, setting up the cluster, memory, hardware and resources. It depends on the use case, but in our case with a shared cluster which is quite large, it is quite expensive."
"The solution is bundled with Palantir Foundry at no extra charge."
"The solution is open-sourced and free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Hadoop solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
University
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise33
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Spark?
Apache Spark is open-source, so it doesn't incur any charges.
What needs improvement with Apache Spark?
I find that there really lacks the technical depth to do any recommendations for future updates of Apache Spark. I used it for two years for our prototype work and testing things, but because I had...
What is your primary use case for Apache Spark?
I attempted to use Apache Spark in one of our customer projects, but after the initial test, our customer moved to another technology and another database system. I do not have any final remarks on...
What needs improvement with Spark SQL?
We do not have any performance problems, but we do have some resource problems. Spark SQL consumes so many resources that we migrated our streaming job from Spark to Apache Flink. Resource manageme...
What is your primary use case for Spark SQL?
Spark SQL has been in our stack for less than one year, though some of our colleagues are using it. It is a useful product for transformation jobs. We generally use Spark SQL for batch processing. ...
What advice do you have for others considering Spark SQL?
Regarding the Catalyst query optimizer, I think we are using it. We were using it in the past, but I am not certain if we use it now. We used it a long time ago. I rate my experience with Spark SQL...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NASA JPL, UC Berkeley AMPLab, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, UC Santa Cruz, TripAdvisor, Taboola, Agile Lab, Art.com, Baidu, Alibaba Taobao, EURECOM, Hitachi Solutions
UC Berkeley AMPLab, Amazon, Alibaba Taobao, Kenshoo, Hitachi Solutions
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Spark vs. Spark SQL and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.