Boomi vs. SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS)

Dell Boomi is well-suited as a middleware to talk between systems. I am a personal fan of Dell's products and I enjoy this service. Dell Boomi is very easy to use, even to the less technically-inclined user. It is less appropriate to use in one system alone, but users would still find it functional in one system alone because it helps manage the system's metadata and allows that system to be integrated with other systems in the future.

Incentivized

Ideal for daily standard ETL use cases whether the data is sourced from / transferred to the native connectors (like SQL Server) or FTP. Best if the company uses MS suite of tools. There are better options in the market for chaining tasks where you want a custom flow of executions depending on the outcome of each process or if you want advanced functionality like API connections, etc.

Incentivized

• Pre-built connectors to almost anything which greatly reduce time to release of your integration needs.
• Easy to use development platform with drag&drop features. Non-technical people could build simple integration processes in no time.
• Great user community where you can get quick help if needed. Boomi people hang around there a lot.

Incentivized

• SSIS works very well pulling well-defined data into SQL Server from a wide variety of data sources.
• It comes free with the SQL Server so it is hard not to consider using it providing you have a team who is trained and experienced using SSIS.
• When SSIS doesn't have exactly what you need you can use C# or VBA to extend its functionality.

Incentivized

• More from a development perspective. It is always difficult to use the properties features. It takes a while to understand how the data/variables can be used across an integration.
• Dell Boomi should also invest more on API Management and not just seen as a ETL,ESB tool.
• Should roll out features more often based on users reviews.

Incentivized

• SSIS memory usage can be quite high particularly when SSI and SQL server are on the same machine
• SSIS is not available on any environment other than Microsoft Windows
• SSIS does not function with any database engine back-end other than Microsoft SQL Server

Incentivized

Dell Boomi has provided us with the ability to connect our campus together using our various existing platforms. There are many supported features and have yet to run into something that we cannot do. Its user interface is very intuitive which would allow users to begin developing fairly easily. There is a myriad of resources available

Incentivized

SSIS is responsible for running core business processed managing core business data. It can be managed, improved and expanded using minimal internal resources. It is also able to support all of our current data infrastructure. Replacing SSIS would be time consuming and costly with no apparent ROI.

Incentivized

First of all, as a service (cloud service), we don't need to care about server maintenance any more, no worries about incorrect configurations, about down time. Second, for maintaining, we don't need a large team to do it. And of course, using Dell Boomi instead of manual transaction could help us to avoid people mistake while inputting data or doing transactions.

Incentivized

It is easy to learn, works great on many features, but needs improvement on ETL troubleshooting and performance monitoring functionality. Great tool on Microsoft stack. it is great with simple, structured datasets. Once logic gets fancy like nested conditionals
complex joins,
reusable transformations, versioned logic …SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) packages become hard to read and harder to maintain. Source control is painful. Errors can be cryptic
Logging takes effort to set up well
Debugging in production is limited.

Incentivized

I would rate Dell Boomi as highly performant. We have used it for 4+ years and have not had any major issues with availability or speed. We also have not observed performance degradation when connecting it with other software solutions.

Incentivized

Raw performance is great. At times, depending on the machine you are using for development, the IDE can have issues. Deploying projects is very easy and the tool set they give you to monitor jobs out of the box is decent. If you do very much with it you will have to write into your projects performance tracking though.

Incentivized

Boomi support was responsive and knowledgable, however being a closed cloud service, it doesn't have good community support. We found the learning curve to be steep and there aren't avenues like google, forums, or blogs that provide community driven insight into the product or how to go about designing solutions using the tool

Incentivized

The support, when necessary, is excellent. But beyond that, it is very rarely necessary because the user community is so large, vibrant and knowledgable, a simple Google query or forum question can answer almost everything you want to know. You can also get prewritten script tasks with a variety of functionality that saves a lot of time.

Incentivized

The implementation may be different in each case, it is important to properly analyze all the existing infrastructure to understand the kind of work needed, the type of software used and the compatibility between these, the features that you want to exploit, to understand what is possible and which ones require integration with third-party tools

Incentivized

MuleSoft and Boomi are built on totally different frameworks. Mulesoft is an API-led network whereas Boomi is an ETL middleware approach. In easy words, Mulesoft can connect to several apps and business units, can create and reuse multiple components. Boomi offers only on-premise and on-cloud integration solutions whereas MuleSoft is capable of providing on-premise, on-cloud as well as hybrid solutions. We can say that MuleSoft is much more flexible and offers multiple integration solutions.

Both are very similar. Azure is cloud based. It is easier for the organization who uses cloud based application. The SQL Server Integration Services is cost effective. Azure was more on the expensive side for our organization. Azure was a little complex, it needed special training to use it. Azure was not accurate with complex data.

Incentivized

• ROI was flat. Coding directly in apps we were knowledgable in would have been faster, but maintenance higher.
• It brought good process to the integration team that was new, however I wouldn't say it was a huge gain monetarily. It is a valid path out of many paths for integration, but doesn't rule them all.

Incentivized

• Without this, we would have to manually update a spreadsheet of our SQL Server inventory
• We would also have poor alerting; if an instance was down we wouldn't know until it was reported by a user
• We only have one other person who uses SQL Server Integration Services , he's the expert. It would fall to me without him and I would not enjoy being responsible for it.

Incentivized