Teradata Reviews

There are two very useful features. 

One is the fast data input for more or less any online data. It performs rather well. Two, it also has a lot of tools for data engineering or data manipulation that are compatible. 

The solution offers an easy setup.

It's stable and reliable.

The solution like scales just fine.

Some of our clients are looking for on-premise installations as well. Although we don't have any, some of our prospects are also asking, and we are not sure if that part is easily doable or is as effective. We haven't tried on-premises, so we don't know how good it is. We are not confident about proposing on-premise to them, since we are more familiar with the cloud. Maybe some documentation on how on-prem works or what other things to look for in on-premise deployment would be helpful. We'd love to see more tutorials. 

Our company does data science and AI machine learning algorithms on the data that is deciding on the Teradata, so that's the value we add. From my perspective, it would be good if they gave better ITIN/R plugins to use the data for AI modeling, or data science modeling. We can do it now; however, it could be more elegant in terms of interfacing.

I've been using the solution for four or five years. 

The solution is very stable, and the performance is good. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

Our clients do not have very large data sets. So far, the environment has scaled fine, however, once the volumes grow, we will have to see whether we are facing any problems or not. Right now, we don't see any problems. We just haven't tried to scale massively.

We haven't needed much technical support. That said, some of my colleagues have been able to contact them and get service as and when required. It's all right. 

On cloud, it is very easy to set up. 

It's moderately priced. It's not cheap. I'd rate it 2.5 out of five in terms of affordability.

I am not knowledgeable about the other vendors to make a meaningful comparison. I haven't really taken the time to evaluate other options. 

The solution is most suitable for medium to large-scale businesses. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I would recommend the solution to others. 

Teradata was mostly a control system for us where we were fetching the data from it on basic time intervals, on various DVs and various schema where we had to fetch the data. Reading was the main operation that we used Teradata for, but while reading, there were complex ENTs that we had to write because of a few data that was supposed to be transformed and then fetched, so that was the major use case for the solution.

There are several features of Teradata that I like. One of the most basic is the indexes. I also like that it provides lower TCO. It also has the optimizer feature which is a good feature and isn't found in other legacy systems. Parallelism is also another feature I like in Teradata because when you are running or hosting on multiple systems, you have this shared-nothing architecture that helps. Loading and unloading in Teradata are also really helpful compared to other systems.

Teradata is good, but eventually, my company is moving to a higher-level system. You wouldn't want to work on a lower-level system.

As for the areas for improvement in Teradata, since I was working on the very basic, legacy systems, the memory thing was always a challenge. If Teradata is moving to the cloud, the space constraint or the memory issue that my company generally faces will eventually resolve, in time.

What I'd like to see in the next release of Teradata is that it becomes full-fledged on the cloud, apart from better connectivity to various systems. For example, if I have to read or include a Python script, if I write some basic codes, I should be able to read even unstructured data. I know that it's not supported even in Snowflake, but at least semi-structured data support, if that can be a little more enhanced, that would be good.

I've been using Teradata for a year and a half now, and I'm using its latest version.

In terms of stability, Teradata is stable. All legacy systems are quite stable and do not have that much downtime, probably because no one would work with a system that is not stable.

Teradata is scalable, but it takes time because you have to increase the servers. On the legacy system, it's the physical servers that you increase and that takes time.

I don't have experience with Teradata technical support, because the client handles the maintenance. It's the client who reaches out to the technical support team in case there's a need to increase service on the Teradata system, or if there's any downtime or any glitches in terms of catching or loading the data, but that doesn't happen often.

Setting up Teradata took time. The server has to be set up and that takes time. Next, the IDs need to be set up and the role level security that the legacy system provides is definitely not up to the mark when compared to the cloud, so that is a concern. I'm talking truly about the legacy system. I haven't worked on the cloud part of it. It took more time to deploy Teradata.

Deploying the solution from dev to the QA environment, for example, creating tables, then copying over the data, are completed within twenty four to forty eight hours. It's the timeframe the DBA used to give, which is pretty high. With the closing features that we have normally, that would be a long time.

Implementation was taken care of by the client.

Teradata pricing is fine, and it's competitive with all the legacy models. On a scale of one to five, with one being the worst and five being the best, I'm giving Teradata a three, because it can be a little expensive, when compared to other solutions.

Teradata requires maintenance, but the team in charge of the maintenance was not in-house. It was taken care of by an external support team. There are forty to fifty users of the solution in the company. I'm use Teradata on a daily basis.

I'm rating Teradata an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a relational database. We use it mainly for logistics. 

The solution offers very good features. It's useful when you are working with data. 

The level of complexity is okay.

It can handle very large amounts of data. It is very powerful. 

Designing the database is easy.

The solution is stable.

It is easy to set up.

The scalability is good. 

Technical support was fine to deal with.

I'd like to see a better relationship with the business itself. Business users have trouble finding solutions when they run into issues in the data warehouse.

It can be a bit complex to work with.

Regarding data warehousing, I'd like to see more data and business analysis to help with the design and development. 

It's primarily designed for big projects and therefore, the pricing is pretty high. It's not suitable for smaller companies. 

I've been using the solution for 20 years.

The solution is stable and reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. As long as it was designed well, a company shouldn't have issues. 

The solution can scale well.

I'm not sure how many users are on the solution. Likely, it is up to hundreds of users. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. We stopped using it this summer. 

We've used support in the past. I had worked closely with them. The technical team was fine to deal with.

It's not too complex. It's designed for huge amounts of data, and it's planned out well. As long as you follow some principles, it won't be too complicated. 

I've used the solution for more than a decade. It was a while since I deployed the solution. 

You start with business analysis and design the database structure from there. After that, you can start populating and developing. 

How many people you need for deployment or maintenance would depend on how big the implementation is. 

Typically, we handle the initial setup in-house. It is possible to get help if we need it. Whether or not a company needs help depends on the customer and their level of comfort with the setup.

I have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing makes sense for bigger projects. It wouldn't make sense for smaller companies or smaller projects.

We are primarily using the latest version of the solution. 

It works well both on-premises and on the cloud. 

I would recommend the solution. However, it depends on the project itself. Based on the stability alone, I would recommend it. It's good for bigger projects. If it is used for small projects, the complexity and price may be too high. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I am a Teradata administrator as well as a developer. I have about 700 users who are using our system, and we are maintaining the system in terms of tuning and in terms of all end-to-end items above the Teradata system.

We are using it as a data warehouse. In the data warehouse, we have got so many users who are doing their reporting and different types of analytics work using the solution.

Teradata's pretty fast. That is one very important aspect of the solution.

There are other tools, like Viewpoint, in Teradata, which is a monitoring tool.  

The integration is pretty easy here in Teradata.

It can scale.

We have found the solution to be stable. 

The market is enhancing, and every day, BigQuery, Snowflake, Redshift, and all these competitors are moving very, very fast. They're bringing out many new features. For example, Snowflake now has Time Travel and cloning and all these very interesting features. Teradata is an old data warehouse, and they're not improving in terms of new, innovative features. Basically, they're pretty much consistent and unchanging. They're not bringing new features. I've been working with it for eight years, and I have not seen so many new features. Maybe there have been only one or two in the last eight years. Innovation is something that is a bit slow with respect to Teradata. Other competitors are better in terms of new innovations. I'd like to see Teradata add features like cloning or time travel.

There is a query tool. However, we need to install the tool in order to fetch records. With other data warehouses, they have a web-based tool that allows for queries without having to download.

The initial setup is not too easy.

When we want to scale, we need to go to Teradata to initiate the process. 

I've been using the solution for around eight years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. I'd rate it nine out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

While the solution is scalable, and you can add new nodes if you want to, it's not instantaneous. We need to reach out to Teradata and they will handle the changes we require. Scaling is a process. 

Technical support has been very good. We have been pleased with the level of attention we receive. 

Positive

I also use BigQuery and Snowflake. They are more complex, and therefore, it can be harder to integrate using them.

Teradata is a better monitoring tool, and it offers better performance with respect to bigger data queries. However, it continues to lack innovation. 

The solution is not straightforward to set up. For example, if I target the users, the users need to install things and set up things up. Even the LDAP integration and all those things are not easy with respect to Teradata if I compare it with BigQuery, Snowflake, and Redshift.

If I want to spin off a new node or anything like that with Teradata, it's a bit tricky compared to other data warehouses where we can easily spin off new nodes and work on them.

Since our system is like a fixed system, when we did this deployment, it didn't take that much time. However, it was not easy. If I wanted to add additional load into the system, I needed to hand over the Teradata system to Teradata, and they had to do it, and that would take a day to do. Now, if I compare it with BigQuery or Snowflake, I can spin off new clusters without any issues. I can just add the number of nodes in that new warehouse, and I can run it. 

How long it takes to deploy depends on how big the system is. That said, compared to others, it definitely takes a little bit of extra time.

Since Teradata takes care of the implementation, I'm not sure how many people are ultimately involved in the deployment. From our side, we had two or three people involved in the setup. 

We have five to six admins to manage a 24/7 project.

Teradata handled a lot fo the implementation for us. 

I'm not overly aware of pricing. That said, my understanding is that it is reasonable. While it has a bit of an edge in pricing, everyone is relatively close in pricing. 

I'm a customer.

I'd advise potential users to do a proper POC first. 

Teradata is beneficial when we have a huge amount of data, and queries are complex. It works well with small queries as well. However, companies won't benefit that much from Teradata if they are only focused on small queries.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If they were more innovative, I would rate them higher. 

IntelliFlex is used in the banking sector as a production system.

IntelliFlex's best feature is its reliability.

I've been using IntelliFlex for three years.

IntelliFlex is very stable, aside from some issues with the Unity Software, though I believe those are being resolved now.

IntelliFlex is easy to scale - one of its best features is that you can upscale it to the size you want. For example, we started in vertical with a six-node system and now have a twenty-four-node system.

IntelliFlex's technical support is excellent.

Positive

The initial setup is complex because there are a lot of factors that come into play, including the amount of software and applications that require access. Deployment takes around two to four months, assuming that all the company's applications are compatible with the system - if not, it may take longer.

IntelliFlex is the Rolls Royce of data warehousing. I would recommend it to other users and rate it nine out of ten.

Our use case is for data warehousing and BI reporting. We are customers of Teradata.

The solution is speedy and doesn't require much of a DBA team, it's kind of baked right into the product.

Any value this product provides is offset by the high cost and lack of scalability. We're moving to Snowflake because of the scalability and cost differentials. There are better, more flexible, robust, and economical options out there.

I've been using this solution on and off for 20 years. 

The solution is stable, it's a best-of-breed product, but the architecture is old school.

The technical support is fine. 

The initial setup was fine but whenever we needed to increase the size and capacity, it would literally take a room full of people, a very coordinated effort and it was a huge project, in contrast to a product like Snowflake, where you literally just change the warehouse size and it auto-scales. So those types of things really hindered Teradata prem. 

The cost depends on the size and it can be quite expensive. If you have 1,000 users, the cost can be anywhere from half a million to a million dollars a year. 

It's hard to compare their on-prem solution to current cloud environments. From an on-prem perspective, it's expensive but fantastic.The problem is that nobody's playing in that space anymore. People are using the cloud, and the cloud has better options.  

Because it's on-prem, I rate this solution four out of 10. 

My primary use of Teradata is for data warehousing.

Teradata's most valuable feature is that it's easy to use.

Teradata's UI could be more user-friendly.

I've been using Teradata for over five years.

Teradata is pretty stable.

Teradata is scalable.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We used an in-house team.

I would rate Teradata as eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for the EDW. 

The performance is the key item we appreciate. We're able to easily trigger jobs and we have access to integrations for running jobs. It's easy to use for the most part, which is why I really like it.

It's stable and reliable.

I've never had any issues with scalability.

The initial setup is pretty simple to set up. 

Apart from Control-M, it would be nice if it could integrate with other tools. Specifically, with respect to the integrations with the automation tools, if that can be increased, and if the tester could be able to test more automation scripts in a better way it would help. The efficiency could always be increased.

Occasionally, at the outset of the implementation process, we struggled a little bit.

I've only used the solution for a few months. It hasn't been a year yet. It hasn't been that long. 

The stability has been good so far. It's reliable and the performance is good. there are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution seems to be scalable. I've never run into any issues with sizing. It's good.

I cannot recall the exact number of users that are on this solution currently. 

Technical support is quite good. We used them once or twice and, as I recall, their response was always very quick. We are quite satisfied with the level of service they offer. 

For the most part, the initial setup is good. We found it pretty straightforward. That said, sometimes, in the beginning, we struggle. 

For us, the deployment took around two hours. It didn't take too long. 

We had about ten members on the technical team that handled deployment and maintenance. 

We are able to handle the initial setup ourselves. As long there are not some prerequisites or system issues, then it's possible for us to handle everything.

I don't have any direct details about the licensing or pricing of the solution. 

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using. It might be a previous version. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. We are quite pleased with its general capabilities.