Apache Spark vs. HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Spark
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (formerly MapR, acquired by HPE in 2019) is a software-defined datastore and file system that simplifies data management and analytics by unifying data across core, edge, and multicloud sources into a single platform. Just as a loom weaves multiple threads into a single piece of fabric, HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric weaves distributed data into a single enterprise-wide data layer that ingests, processes, and stores data once and then makes it available for reuse across multiple…N/A
Pricing
Apache SparkHPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache SparkHPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache SparkHPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Considered Both Products
Apache Spark

No answer on this topic

HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Chose HPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
I don't believe there is as much support for MapR yet compared to other more widely known products.
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Apache SparkHPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Cloudera Manager
Cloudera Manager
Score 9.7 out of 10
Cloudera Manager
Cloudera Manager
Score 9.7 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM Analytics Engine
IBM Analytics Engine
Score 9.3 out of 10
IBM Analytics Engine
IBM Analytics Engine
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache SparkHPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Likelihood to Recommend
9.7
(24 ratings)
7.2
(4 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.6
(6 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache SparkHPE Ezmeral Data Fabric (MapR)
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Well suited: To most of the local run of datasets and non-prod systems - scalability is not a problem at all. Including data from multiple types of data sources is an added advantage. MLlib is a decently nice built-in library that can be used for most of the ML tasks. Less appropriate: We had to work on a RecSys where the music dataset that we used was around 300+Gb in size. We faced memory-based issues. Few times we also got memory errors. Also the MLlib library does not have support for advanced analytics and deep-learning frameworks support. Understanding the internals of the working of Apache Spark for beginners is highly not possible.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
MapR is more well-suited for people who know what they are doing. I consider MapR the Hadoop distribution professionals use.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Apache Spark makes processing very large data sets possible. It handles these data sets in a fairly quick manner.
  • Apache Spark does a fairly good job implementing machine learning models for larger data sets.
  • Apache Spark seems to be a rapidly advancing software, with the new features making the software ever more straight-forward to use.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • MapR had very fast I/O throughput. The write speed was several times faster than what we could achieve with the other Hadoop vendors (Cloudera and Hortonworks). This is because MapR does not use HDFS, which is essentially a "meta filesystem". HDFS is built on top of the filesystem provided by the OS. MapR has their filesystem called MapR-FS, which is a true filesystem and accesses the raw disk drives.
  • The MapR filesystem is very easy to integrate with other Linux filesystems. When working with HDFS from Apache Hadoop, you usually have to use either the HDFS API or various Hadoop/HDFS command line utilities to interact with HDFS. You cannot use command line utilities native to the host operation system, which is usually Linux. At least, it is not easily done without setting up NFS, gateways, etc. With MapR-FS, you can mount the filesystem within Linux and use the standard Unix commands to manipulate files.
  • The HBase distribution provided by MapR is very similar to the Apache HBase distribution. Cloudera and Hortonworks add GUIs and other various tools on top of their HBase distributions. The MapR HBase distribution is very similar to the Apache distribution, which is nice if you are more accustomed to using Apache HBase.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • Memory management. Very weak on that.
  • PySpark not as robust as scala with spark.
  • spark master HA is needed. Not as HA as it should be.
  • Locality should not be a necessity, but does help improvement. But would prefer no locality
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • It takes time to get latest versions of Apache ecosystem tools released as it has to be adapted.
  • When you have issues related to Mapr-FS or Mapr Tables, its hard to figure them out by ourselves.
  • Sometime new ecosystem tools versions are released without proper QA.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
Capacity of computing data in cluster and fast speed.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
No answers on this topic
Usability
Apache
The only thing I dislike about spark's usability is the learning curve, there are many actions and transformations, however, its wide-range of uses for ETL processing, facility to integrate and it's multi-language support make this library a powerhouse for your data science solutions. It has especially aided us with its lightning-fast processing times.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Apache
1. It integrates very well with scala or python. 2. It's very easy to understand SQL interoperability. 3. Apache is way faster than the other competitive technologies. 4. The support from the Apache community is very huge for Spark. 5. Execution times are faster as compared to others. 6. There are a large number of forums available for Apache Spark. 7. The code availability for Apache Spark is simpler and easy to gain access to. 8. Many organizations use Apache Spark, so many solutions are available for existing applications.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Apache
All the above systems work quite well on big data transformations whereas Spark really shines with its bigger API support and its ability to read from and write to multiple data sources. Using Spark one can easily switch between declarative versus imperative versus functional type programming easily based on the situation. Also it doesn't need special data ingestion or indexing pre-processing like Presto. Combining it with Jupyter Notebooks (https://github.com/jupyter-incubator/sparkmagic), one can develop the Spark code in an interactive manner in Scala or Python
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
I don't believe there is as much support for MapR yet compared to other more widely known products.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Faster turn around on feature development, we have seen a noticeable improvement in our agile development since using Spark.
  • Easy adoption, having multiple departments use the same underlying technology even if the use cases are very different allows for more commonality amongst applications which definitely makes the operations team happy.
  • Performance, we have been able to make some applications run over 20x faster since switching to Spark. This has saved us time, headaches, and operating costs.
Read full review
Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • Increased employee efficiency for sure. Our clients have various levels of expertise in their deployment and user teams, and we never receive complaints about MapR.
  • MapR is used by one of our financial services clients who uses it for fraud detection and user pattern analysis. They are able to turn around data much faster than they previously had with in-house applications
Read full review
ScreenShots