Snowflake Reviews

I use this solution to create a proof of concept. I also create training for companies on Snowflake.

It is a very easy-to-use solution. It is user-friendly, and its setup time is very less.

They have a new console, but I couldn't figure out anything in the new console. So, if I shift to the old console, I can figure out where to create the database schema and other things, but I have no idea where to go in the new console. That's one thing they can improve. I don't know why they created a new console to confuse. The old, classic console is much better.

I started using Snowflake three months ago. 

It is stable.

It is scalable.

It is so easy that I didn't have to look for technical support. Its documentation is amazingly simple.

I also use Databricks for proof of concept and training. I have used Databricks much longer than Snowflake. Both have their own pros and cons.

In terms of ease of use, UI, and setup time, Snowflake is good. I would rate Snowflake a nine out of 10 from these aspects. In terms of workload, Databricks has higher points. The underlying infrastructure is faster for Databricks, which is not the case with Snowflake. Snowflake is a cloud database. So, in terms of processing power, Databricks has an advantage over Snowflake. Databricks is more suitable for larger workloads, whereas, for a regular or typical data warehouse that you want to run on the cloud, Snowflake is more suitable. 

Its setup was easy. You can create a connection and be up and running within half an hour.

I set it up myself.

I have not been billed yet, but it should be less. I'm still running the trial version, but it seems to be less than Databricks.

You must try it out. It is a wonderful product. I would also recommend trying out other products, such as Yellowbrick, and doing a comparison. Redshift has also come up with some serverless options. BigQuery is also there. BigQuery is as easy as Snowflake. So, my recommendation or advice is to try out these things and then pick the one that suits you. I don't have any bias towards any of the products. I have an impartial opinion about all the cloud data warehousing products.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We're running a POC to test scalability, performance, on-demand resource management, workload management, et cetera. The security aspect will also be important for us.

The product offers a lot of great features.

Architectural-wise, it's got great architecture. That's what we are looking for. It's kind of decoupled from storage and has virtual warehouses. We like that we can travel and keep things virtual. For us, the virtual warehousing is likely the most valuable aspect. You can spin up as many virtual warehouses that you want. That's quite useful as a feature.

I haven't found that the solution is lacking any features. It's quite complete.

I would like to see a client version of the GUI. Right now, it is a web GUI, which has stored the SQL, the worksheets. We are asking for that from Snowflake. We'd like to understand how can we save these worksheets on our local desktop. That is not there at this point.

I've been using the solution for about the past year as part of a POC.

In the past, we've used an SQL server. On the cloud side of it, we do have some experience. Snowflake, however, is the new data warehouse solution that we are looking into it.

If necessary, we may have to get into Synapse, and do a kind of a pilot project with that as well. We may evaluate them both to see which is better. We are not there yet. We are just working on Snowflake.

We are a direct customer and end-user.

We've been using the solution during a POC for the last year or so. It's a pilot project to test its feasibility for our company. We're just starting to get performance stats and stuff like that.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we are currently using. I don't recall the exact version number. Usually, people are running the latest version. Whatever the latest available option is is likely the number we are on.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're still in the POC phase, however, based on what we have seen, we are quite satisfied.

I am using Snowflake for all our apps and data warehousing requirements.

The most valuable feature of Snowflake is it's an all-in-one data warehousing solution. 

Snowflake could improve migration. It should be made easier. It would be beneficial if it could offer some OLTP features. One of our customers was using Oracle for both data warehousing and OLTP workloads, and they were able to migrate their data warehousing workloads to Snowflake without major issues. However, for some of their OLTP requirements, such as needing a response time of fewer than 10 milliseconds for certain queries, Snowflake is currently unable to provide that.

It would be beneficial to see more integration and reporting tools embedded within the platform, similar to what Microsoft offers with its data warehouse and database solutions. Oracle, on the other hand, does not have such features. While Snowflake has a lot of options available on its marketplace, it would be helpful if it could provide more optimal options for users who are migrating from other environments. It would be great if they could follow the same path as Microsoft in this regard.

I have been using Snowflake for approximately one year.

Snowflake is stable.

We have two clients using this solution.

The solution is highly scalable.

We don't have direct support for Snowflake as we support our clients. If any support is required, our clients connect with Snowflake's support team and get the necessary assistance. They own the support account.

The initial setup of Snowflake is easy. We only need to create a login, there is no conventional setup.

When it comes to migrating from a previous platform to Snowflake, it largely depends on the size of the data warehouse, the number of integrations, the existing data pipelines, and the type of data sources. The complexity and size of the current deployment will determine how difficult the migration process will be.

The ROI appears good on paper, particularly in terms of cost reduction in operations. However, as companies have only been using Snowflake for a year and it's hard to say for sure. It looks promising for now, but it will take a year or so to see if it holds up in practice.

Snowflake is a cloud-based solution that uses a pay-as-you-go model. The storage and processing are separated, and you are mainly charged for the processing power you use. Additionally, there is a charge for storage, but the primary cost comes from the processing. You can choose different sizes of processing units, also known as warehouses, for your specific workload or requirements. You pay for the per-second utilization of those computing resources.

Snowflake is cost-effective. However, the cost can depend on how it's being used and how efficiently the code is written. If engineers don't write efficient code and usage is billed based on processing, it can become costly. If they write optimal code and choose the best solution, it can reduce costs in comparison to other options, such as Oracle.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Snowflake an eight out of ten.

Snowflake is a real-time and cloud-based complete ETL tool. You can receive the beta from various sources from Amazon. You can run your reports and do analysis in  Snowflake. Informatica and Tableau should have done this. Snowflake is a modern version of Informatica which is 100 percent in the cloud.

Snowflake has a variety of other ETL provisions that they provide. You can use your own ETL pipeline. Additionally, they provide adapters, and they are always evolving, it is a well-developed solution.

Snowflake has to build more capabilities because they have only built very few adapters, but they're growing and they're building. They should provide provisions to collect ETL pipeline capabilities, reduce developer work, and make more rapid application development, rather than some customizations. There are very few options, but they are building. I hope they will build ETL rapid application development provisions with more variety.

I have been using Snowflake for approximately eight months.

Snowflake is highly stable.

Snowflake is a cloud solution that provides great scalability. However, I am not sure if it is cost-effective.

We have approximately 30 engineers using this solution. We have plans to scale our usage in the future. This is going to be a futuristic solution.

We have not had any problems with the technical support.

The initial setup of Snowflake is straightforward. To set up the ETL pipeline, pull the data, and then generate the reports takes approximately two hours, end to end.

I did the implementation in-house. We have a three-member team that does the maintenance of Snowflake. However, the amount of people needed depends on the size of the pipeline.

Snowflake licensing is more flexible and it is cheaper than other solutions. I can use it for only 10 days for MVP, or three years, and for flexible models. I can scale up, or down, and the pricing is based on the volume and duration. There are many licensing permutation combinations available.

I rate Snowflake a nine out of ten.

I have used it in my previous company. It was just a SQL server data warehouse using reporting tools on top of it. It was an on-premise SQL server environment, and it was a typical data warehouse use case, but we wanted to do things faster and more cost-effectively. 

We used it to modernize our data warehouse. We didn't want to invest more in on-premise servers, and we were looking for a way to quickly get more data joined together. 

It had definitely improved the way our organization functioned at the time.

The overall ecosystem was easy to manage. Given that we weren't a very highly technical group, it was preferable to other things we looked at because it could do all of the cloud tunings. It can tune your data warehouse to an appropriate size for controlled billing, resume and sleep functions, and all such things. It was much more simple than doing native Azure or AWS development. 

It was stable, and their support was also perfect. It was also very easy to deploy. It was one of those rare times where they did exactly what they said they could do.

Their strategy is just to leverage what you've got and put Snowflake in the middle. It does work well with other tools. You have to buy a separate reporting tool and a separate data loading tool, whereas, in some platforms, these tools are baked in. In the long-term, they'll need to add more direct partnerships to the ecosystem so that it's not like adding on tools around Snowflake to make it work. They can also consider including Snowflake native reporting tools versus partnering with other reporting tools. It would kind of change where they sit in the market.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

We didn't run into anything. We had outages for a couple of seconds, but they were related to Amazon or AWS. They weren't related to Snowflake.

We scaled it a little bit. We didn't have a lot of data to scale, as a lot of companies do. We only had a couple of terabytes of data, which is insignificant for a cloud platform. 

The development team had three or four people getting data in. Then report people were also using the platform, but they didn't really have to know that it was Snowflake because they were going at it through a reporting tool. There were probably 30 or 40 people writing queries against our reporting tools, which were, in turn, using Snowflake.

They were really good. They were very responsive. There were never any issues with them. I would give them a ten out of ten.

I've used a lot of different data warehousing solutions at different companies.

It was easy as pie. In a couple of hours, it was up and running, and we were loading the data in. We had a fairly senior developer for that. He knew SQL server and queries very well. If you're used to developing in any type of SQL environment, you can jump in and use Snowflake really quickly.

It is per credit. It has a use-it-as-you-go model. We bought a chunk of 20,000 credits, and they were lasting us for at least a year. We didn't have the scale of data like a much larger company to consume more credits. For us, it was very inexpensive.

Their strategy is just to leverage what you've got and put Snowflake in the middle. It doesn't make it expensive because most of the organizations already have reporting tools. Now, if you were starting from scratch, it might be cheaper to go a different way.

If time to value is your primary goal, then I would recommend going for Snowflake over one of the other cloud providers.

I would rate Snowflake a ten out of ten. It is one of the few products in which everything demos well. It actually did everything they showed in the demos. We really couldn't find any gotchas in it. It kind of delivered as promised.

We primarily use the solution in order to have the daily transactions of trades. It's to manipulate and find out the benchmark of every broker and institutional manager.

The solution's most valuable aspect is the ability to process the bulk amount of data and try to clone the database. We try to clone the production database. Instead of syncing the whole database, we can just clone it up and start working on it. Basically, the cloning and the database are very user-friendly.

The solution is very stable.

Right now, Snowflake doesn't have any analytical functions, especially in comparison to Oracle and other databases. The analytical performance needs to improve. It would be ideal if Snowflake was able to use the analytical functions, and what we have in the relational database. That would be really helpful. 

They don't have any SLAs in place. It would be better if they did.

I've been working with the solution for two years now. The company, however, has been using it for three years at this point.

The solution is quite stable. It's reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There aren't bugs or glitches.

The solution is definitely scalable. We're able to add nodes to grow it out when we need to. If an organization needs to expand the solution, they can do so easily. We find it to be very reliable.

There are about 300 people using the solution at this time. We don't plan on increasing usage at this time.

Technical support is very, very good. It's a responsive and knowledgable team. We're quite satisfied with the level of service we receive.

That said, Snowflake technical support doesn't have any SLAs. If they had a small amount of SLAs, then it would be helpful for us to clear or solve any production issues, etc. that we may run into.

We need about 50-60 people to maintain the solution.

Snowflake's pricing is a bit higher than other competitors.

We were looking at Amazon Redshift previously. However, we decided that Snowflake was more reliable and scalable.

We're a customer. We don't have a business relationship with the solution.

Users considering adding the solution should understand that Snowflake can be used only for transactional processing, not for analytical processing. If they want to go for transaction processing, they can go for Snowflake and if they want to go for analytical processing, they should look at or go for an Oracle database.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The solution has use cases related to retail stores and sales.

The most valuable features of Snowflake are that you have to pay per usage, and you don't have to worry about the maintenance of the data warehouse because it is on the cloud.

The solution’s pricing could be cheaper. It would be helpful if Snowflake could create good reports instead of using Power BI reports.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

Snowflake is a scalable solution. We have four to five customers for Snowflake who use it regularly.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution's deployment in a development environment takes only a couple of minutes.

Users have to pay a licensing fee for the solution, which is expensive.

Snowflake is deployed on the cloud. The solution is providing HIPAA compliance, which is sufficient. Users looking for a pay-as-you-use product available on Azure or AWS should consider Snowflake.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use it for data warehousing. I just design databases, put data in there, and get data out.

Although I haven't used it much, it is very fast and the performance is great.

It has some technical quirks that whoever is using it needs to be aware of. It doesn't enforce typical relational database constraints. If you're not aware of that, you can really put some bad data in there.

I've been using it for about three months.

I would give it a ten out of ten. I haven't seen it failover.

I've never had any issues with it. It is being extensively used. We have between a hundred and a thousand users using Snowflake.

I have not had any experience with customer support, but I've heard it's good.

I've heard it's quite expensive.

I would give Snowflake a seven out of ten.