SAP HANA Reviews

What is good about SAP HANA is its simplicity and its flexibility. 

Its in-memory capabilities are good, which is why many companies still use it. 

SAP HANA is a very proprietary tool and there's not as much support available for it as there is for an SQL Server (which is more popular). 

It requires some internal SAP knowledge to work with the tool and it's a completely graphical modeling kind of a system. You can't come in cold with no knowledge or understanding of the solution and think you can jump in and start working.

You have to work with the very few tools that are given to you. It could probably increase its flexibility and there could be more components added, which would make it more versatile. They could improve the solution by adding more components and by making it more feature-rich and including typical features that other more popular tools have.

There needs to be better support from the SAP support team. There needs to be more support for other programming languages like high-level C++, Java, or Python. That could be another improvement. 

HANA needs more integration with open-source tools, and with general reporting and analytics tools that are out there on the market. Once again, more integration on so many levels would be amazing. It's very SAP-centric and very proprietary right now. There are ways to connect SAP HANA with many tools already, however, in particular with open-source tools, if there could be even more integration, that would be helpful.

There needs to be more data transformation and more ELT features that can be implemented in the view. 

While I'm not exactly sure how long the company itself has used the solution, I've been dealing with it for four years at this point. It's been a while.

In terms of stability, I can't comment much. It depends on the underlying system and infrastructure, and it has the same kind of stability as any other on-premise solution. It doesn't have any cloud features such as multiple replication and multiple locations, et cetera. In that sense, it has the same stability as any other on-premise solution and does not guarantee any SLA. 

In terms of scalability, it's quite scalable. We've used it for production solutions very often and from any number of users. Generally, there are a few hundred users or so. I have not really worked on an implementation that uses thousands of users or anything that big, so I can't really comment on massive scaling. However, if it's for enterprise applications that have a few hundred internal users, it's good. 

The community support needs to be better. I haven't been impressed with it. In general, it just needs better support.

I have only worked on SAP and I haven't worked on other solutions.

I don't have information on the pricing, as that is an SAP and corporate-level agreement, which is not really known by all the in-house teams. I'm not really aware of the pricing. On the internet, I couldn't find much information about the cost of SAP HANA. I have heard that it is an expensive option. Being an enterprise-level solution, however, I don't have exact numbers. 

I'm not really part of the decision making team or the architecture team. I do not know if my organization has a business relationship with SAP or not.

I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

In the case of enterprise projects, I've heard that SAP HANA is used very widely. I would say, in general, it would be good to explore other alternatives, and not just go with HANA. It would be good to explore big data alternatives that are out there. They might be a better fit. Databricks these days seems to be quite popular. It might be an interesting alternative for some organizations. Depending on the use case, I'd recommend that other alternatives should be considered. If it's a reporting solution that people are building, which is using a lot of SAP internal data, then SAP HANA is a good option. Otherwise, other alternatives are out there.

We primarily use the solution as a kind-of database for our workloads.

The solution is extremely stable. That's the most important aspect of the solution, for our organization. There is no downtime, and the performance is very good.

You can upgrade and upscale without any downtime as well. It's excellent.

The HANA appliance is certified and can be seamlessly implemented based on the HANA platform dependency. Everything works. On a daily basis, it runs extremely well.

The pricing is pretty good.

I don't think that there is a feature that is lacking. It's quite good as a solution and we're pretty happy with most aspects of the product.

I'd just like to see some more improvements done on the training, both on the functional training and technical training sides as a part of the complete solution. 

Currently, training is assumed to be a separate part of the solution. You have to purchase it separately. This should be a part of the solution's mandatory requirements. Most of the time, people fail to purchase training, and they fall back on it afterward, during implementation, as they realize how crucial it is.

I've been using the solution for three years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is very, very stable. It's reliable and its performance is excellent. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It runs all the time without issues.

You can easily scale this solution. In fact, you can scale it and upgrade it without ever experiencing any downtime. It's excellent in that sense. If an organization needs to expand it, they can do so with no issues whatsoever.

We have a dedicated support person from Cisco that assists us if we need any help. We also have a service level agreement. We're quite satisfied with the level of service. They are professional, knowledgeable, and responsive.

We had specialists that handled the implementation. We didn't handle it ourselves. It would be difficult to comment on the level of difficulty since we didn't manage the setup in-house.

We had specialists from OEM that took care of everything for us. We also had consultants from Cisco. They gave us initial assemblers until everything was scaled properly. 

We're pretty happy with the pricing. It's not overly expensive.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with SAP HANA.

I'd rate the solution around nine out of ten. It's practically perfect.

It's a great solution and I would recommend it.

There's some configuration that needs to happen at the outset, however, after that, there isn't much dependency on the technical side, which makes it very user-friendly for companies.

The memory capabilities are great.

The performance is very, very good. It's one of the best aspects of the solution.

I've used Oracle for ten years, and yet, I find SAP better than Oracle. Oracle is more cost-based.

Oracle tends to have better features than SAP HANA. They should work to add the kinds of features clients expect from Oracle.

With Oracle, you can install their cloud and that enables you to see more of the database and multiple accounts. This is better than what SAP has on offer.

SAP could really work on its monitoring capabilities.

There's data aging that needs to be dealt with on the solution. It's not ideal. You might have a lot of raw data and aging can really affect it.

It would be help if the solution had a graph database. They're lacking that right now.

There's an issue in the partition. When you record more than two million records, partitioning does not work well. In Oracle it's easy. SAP must resolve this issue in order to be more competitive with Oracle.

I've been using the solution for about five years at this point. It's been about half a decade.

The scalability of the solution is pretty good. We don't have any problems in that area.

We've dealt with technical support in the past. It wasn't that good. Sometimes the information we received from them wasn't accurate. It's a difficult solution. I would say, to be fair, that their support is better than Oracle's.

In the case of Oracle, I had an issue once with Oracle GoldenGate. It took two weeks to resolve the issue. That's far too long. SAP is much more responsive. It's never taken two weeks to resolve anything.

We also used Oracle. We find SAP to be very fast. It's much faster than Oracle.

The initial setup was five years ago, so it's been a while. However, I do recall it being straightforward. We typically install a version on Linux. While it can be difficult, at the moment, it's pretty good. Things have changed a bit, and they've improved the setup a bit. It's not really that unsimilar to Microsoft's SQL server.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with SAP.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

We use an on-premises version and e have a private cloud in our company.

I'd recommend the solution. If you have, for example, a huge project that's kind of a unique, scalable database I recommend SAP HANA for it. It's easy to use and handles more RAM.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We're writing SQL queries for the verification process, and we're using SAP master tables for tables. We write huge queries for processing data.

The feature that I like the most is that we can transport the data to our web data application.

SAP HANA's performance is really perfect. We're working on big data, and SAP HANA is really working on high performance. We are happy working with it.

The user experience should be better. Its user interface is not good. I also don't like the transition concept. 

I have been working in the SAP HANA environment for around two years.

We have experienced some glitches, and we are solving them with the help of our technical team.

It is a bit complex, but if you follow the instructions, it can be installed. The initial setup could be easier.

SAP HANA is expensive, which isn't a problem for us because it is processing the data so fast.

It is an SAP tool. Therefore, replicating the data from SAP to HANA is easy because it provides a high-performance area without overworking the SAP site. Working with big data is really nice in the SAP HANA database.

I would rate SAP HANA a seven out of ten. I took some points because of the pricing, user experience, and stability issues.

The user interface is very good. You can do any kind of reporting analytics from the platform.

The solution needs to improve its integration capabilities.

There could be some debugging techniques when the solution goes wrong or if some of the data is wrong.

The solution needs to work a little bit faster.

When you do a report on a non-SAP platform, you face some compatibility problems.

I've been using the solution for seven years.

HANA is currently a stable solution after many upgrades. It's been seven years in the market, so it's fairly mature. It's been working fine for many clients here.

Scalability is good. That's the reason many customers like it. Initially, it was not so good and there were some problems with the software when it came to the market. Now it's fool proof in terms of running solutions for many clients. We typically handle enterprise-level businesses, so companies that have 500+ employees.

In terms of technical support, it depends on what partnership you have with SAP. If you're a platinum partner or a gold partner, for example, you can expect a certain level of support. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too difficult to install if you are experienced with the solution.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend the solution. It's a very good product to learn and it's easy to use once you have an understanding of the technology. It's a nice product to work on.

I'd rate it eight out of ten.

The deployment model used was on-premises.

The most valuable feature is the unique style of this solution, on the performance side and then the data. 

The data storage requirement is reduced from the original database to the HANA database.

Previously the data takes 100% storage space, but when moved to HANA, the data was 70% to 75%. The data compression is very high.

If you are using SAP applications, HANA is suitable.

I think that the pricing is high and it needs improvement.

In the next release, they could separate the modules from the costing of the database. If they bundle it together with a new affordable price then customers will be ready to purchase it.

They need an affordable price to achieve most of the minimum requirement assets.

This solution is stable.

They keep upgrading to new versions and keep adding new add-ons to this solution. It is helpful to the customers who are ready to run HANA.

The initial setup is not complex to install. Anyone with Windows or a Mac would know the process.

The pricing is expensive and it should be broken into two products.

People who are technical will accept the cost, but financially they will assess whether this solution will bring them revenue or not. People often ask, how will I profit when the cost is so high?

If you value a good product and can afford it, then add it to the business.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The speed of the solution, and the clarity offered are the solution's most valuable features. 

The functionality is of the solution is very good.

The challenge right now is all databases are on S4 HANA architecture. You're running it for HANA, but not all the functionalities are available. If they can speed up getting all the databases on S4 HANA that would help.

The production seems to be stable, but outside of that some of the QA doesn't show as 100% stable. Currently, we're still assessing whether it's a network issue or it's a server problem. That said, it is pretty stable in production.

We have been in touch with technical support, but not for any major issues. I'd rate them seven out of ten.

The initial setup was a bit complex for us because we had a lot of other add-on solutions, like the Open Expanding Invoice Management solution. We had to upgrade it because the current version we had, 10.5, wasn't compatible with the upgraded S4 HANA. 

I found the process complex because I had to re-implement all open expanding invoice management. We were using ICC and ICC also wasn't compatible either. We had to then switch over to BCC, which I had to re-implement and reconfigure the whole system again. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Right now, they say the solution is S4 HANA, but, not everything on there is S4 HANA, so it is kind of confusing that they say that they're moving us to S4 HANA, but we are not really on it. Because of that, we're not 100% happy. Once everything is properly moved over, it might be better.

I am the technical consultant at our firm and our primary use case of the solution is to manage our databases. 

We don't really use the solution for code integration purposes but one feature I find very valuable, is the response time of the application on the database memory. 

If the developers were to enhance or improve the application logic while processing the transactions, that would be great. For example, if you are accessing a transection, it takes about 10 seconds. So the logic behind the transection usually is part of the development part and a product code is not from the database.

The solution is currently very stable. We have about 80,000 people in our company's underlying database.

The technical support is good and they were very helpful.

The initial setup was complex and we had to contact the vendor a couple of times. And for the licensing part we've also had a couple of issues. We did the deployment ourselves, as a team. 

On a scale from one to ten, I rate this solution an eight. In the future I would like to see the response time of the application being much faster than it currently is. The response time on  a task should be faster so that we don't have to wait for 10 seconds each time.