Fivetran vs. Presto

Fivetran's business model justifies the use-case where we require data from a single source basically a lot of data but if the requirement is not on the heavier side, Fivetran comes to costly operation when compared to its peers. Otherwise, I'll recommend Fivetran for stability and update and seamless service provider.

Incentivized

Presto is for interactive simple queries, where Hive is for reliable processing. If you have a fact-dim join, presto is great..however for fact-fact joins presto is not the solution.. Presto is a great replacement for proprietary technology like Vertica

Incentivized

• Easily connects to source data using delivered connectors
• Transforms data into standard models and schemas
• Has very good documentation to help quickly setup connectors

Incentivized

• Linking, embedding links and adding images is easy enough.
• Once you have become familiar with the interface, Presto becomes very quick & easy to use (but, you have to practice & repeat to know what you are doing - it is not as intuitive as one would hope).
• Organizing & design is fairly simple with click & drag parameters.

Incentivized

• Very difficult to get connectors enhanced if a specific needed object is not supported by them
• Depending on the edition needed and the data volumes, can get quite expensive

Incentivized

• Presto was not designed for large fact fact joins. This is by design as presto does not leverage disk and used memory for processing which in turn makes it fast.. However, this is a tradeoff..in an ideal world, people would like to use one system for all their use cases, and presto should get exhaustive by solving this problem.
• Resource allocation is not similar to YARN and presto has a priority queue based query resource allocation..so a query that takes long takes longer...this might be alleviated by giving some more control back to the user to define priority/override.
• UDF Support is not available in presto. You will have to write your own functions..while this is good for performance, it comes at a huge overhead of building exclusively for presto and not being interoperable with other systems like Hive, SparkSQL etc.

Incentivized

Very easy and intuitive to setup and maintain as there usually are not that many options. Very well documented (e.g. how to setup each connector, how the schema looks like, any specific features of this connector etc.). Also the operation is intuitive, e.g. you have status pages, log pages, configuration pages etc. for each connector.

Incentivized

It runs pretty well and gets our data from point A to point cluster quickly enough. Honestly, it's not something I think about unless it breaks and that's pretty rare.

Incentivized

We never seriously considered using anything else. Our data engineers had used Fivetran extensively in previous roles so when it came time to make a decision, there wasn't much of a process. They gladly signed the contract with Fivetran pretty quickly.

Incentivized

Presto is good for a templated design appeal. You cannot be too creative via this interface - but, the layout and options make the finalized visual product appealing to customers. The other design products I use are for different purposes and not really comparable to Presto.

Incentivized

• It has been very positive in serving BI team with new source requests
• It has been OK at scaling to match as data volumes as source data size grows

Incentivized

• Presto has helped scale Uber's interactive data needs. We have migrated a lot out of proprietary tech like Vertica.
• Presto has helped build data driven applications on its stack than maintain a separate online/offline stack.
• Presto has helped us build data exploration tools by leveraging it's power of interactive and is immensely valuable for data scientists.

Incentivized