Informatica PowerCenter was data integration technology designed to form the foundation for data integration initiatives, application migration, or analytics. It is a legacy product.
N/A
SSIS
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) is a data integration solution.
Basically the two solutions have, more or less, the same functions and features.The difference, for me, is that ThreatQuotient make more features over the security and I think is oriented to a SOC enviroments.
InformaticaExchange Connectors is oriented to the quality, …
Informatica PowerCenter is highly flexible and scalable for different types of data and it has any inbuilt function to transform our data into the meta data structure. Some of the tool sets such as TDM, is good in some ways but need EBF more than often when running into any …
Informatica is a mature enterprise data integration platform for ETL jobs. Informatica has a suite full of tools other than PowerCenter that can be used for various use cases. It makes sense to know what the entire suite offers rather than just power center so large …
PowerCenter is simply so robust and refined that most other apps cannot do as much as it can. Even Informatica’s own Cloud version is so anemic as to not even compare against it. While from that perspective it feels bloated with too much to navigate through, many of those …
SSIS is a good entry into ETL, for smaller organizations or Microsoft-centric companies. It's strengths lie in its ease-of-use, quick turnaround, and simplicity. Its weaknesses lie in scalability and re-usability (you can achieve re-usability, however segmentation is at the …
While Talend offers a much more comfortable interface to work with, Informatica's forte is performance. And on that front, Informatica Enterprise Data Integration certainly leaves Talend in the dust. For a more back-end-centric use case, Informatica is certainly the ETL tool of …
Microsoft SSIS, Ab Initio and IBM DataStage are evaluated against Informatica. Informatica scored well on licensing, hardware infrastructure flexibility and Big Data connectivity
PowerCenter is very similar to DataStage, in that they both deal with the movement and manipulation of data from one source/system to another. As we use both extensively at my company, I cannot say how it compares beyond that both are well liked and widely used. I would assume …
PowerCenter can be run from different types of OSs and can integrate with multiple types of databases and applications compared to SSIS. PowerCenter performs better with any type of database due to its ability to use native drivers to read as well as load data. Due to its seam …
PowerCenter is the industry leader when it comes to interfacing with multiple source and target systems. The graphical interface increases employee productivity while reducing human resource expenditures and training requirements. These other tools offer some similar …
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 …
I think SQL Server Integration Services is better suited for on-premises data movement and ADF is more suited for the cloud. Though ADF has more connectors, SQL Server Integration Services is more robust and has better functionality just because it has been around much longer
Fivetran, Stitch, and Etleap are all 1000x more modern than SSIS and 100x less aggravating. While those tools are mainly used to sync data rather than transform it, the ELT model works much better than the ETL model in most situations.
We just selected SSIS because we use SQL Server Management System (SSMS) to manage our database. As SSIS is a component of the Microsoft SQL Server there are no problems with integration and everything works perfectly. In addition, we don't have to learn how to use another …
Low-cost relative to other products - in fact, zero cost if one is considering the license cost as being for the database engine with Integration Services added on. It has a comparable range of functionality and performance and as such it's a 'no-brainer' to use SSIS over …
SnapLogic and Azure Data Factory are better than SQL Server Integration Services mostly because they are Integration Platform as a Service (IPAAS) services, whereas SQL Server Integration Services is an on-premise. So the basic differences such as, need a VPN to connect to the …
SSIS is similar to Alteryx and Informatica PowerCenter in a way because these are all drag-and-drop ETL tools with similar functionality. Alteryx is a step ahead because it has some advanced ETL functionalities including statistical calculations etc. and a better ability to set …
Alteryx Designer is easier to use for machine learning models. The functionality of drag and drop is the most valuable. It is a very user-friendly tool that can be understood easily. My teams also work with other solutions, such as Integration Services, and these solutions are …
I had nothing to do with the choice or install. I assume it was made because it's easy to integrate with our SQL Server environment and free. I'm not sure of any other enterprise level solution that would solve this problem, but I would likely have approached it with …
SAP Business Objects was a primary concurrent software against the MS SSIS but it has a more steep learning curve and requires additional investment into the SAP-related software infrastructure. With SSIS one can start easily with simple data extraction / DTL tools of Express …
I personally prefer SSIS. There are items that each do better than the others, but the ease of use of SSIS, along with its extensibility to 3rd party, ability to write any code required in the tool, and uses the same IDE for the MS BI suite (more of an issue if you're not a …
I used the Pentaho Data Integration (PDI) ETL tool. The PDI ETL tool does not have a public user collection like the SQL Server Integration Services(SSIS) ETL tool. Therefore, you may not be able to find instant solutions for your problems. But it has advantages over the SSIS …
SQL Server is already in our wheelhouse so it only made sense to utilize the tools we already had available to us--SSIS, SSAS, & SSRS. Other non-technical users seem to be more comfortable using alternatives to SSIS. However, these alternatives are not as good as SSIS at …
These are all great products and, honestly, can move data faster. They include more enterprise features and have some great qualities about each. However, they all cost a lot depending on the implementation you need. With SQL Server Integration Services, you do not have any …
When looking to evaluate different options, we looked first to the experience and software we had in-house that would accomplish the job. When assessing alternatives outside we were looking for the tool that would offer the most flexibility.
It’s basically a free tool and it has more features than anyone would ever need. If you look online for answers for SISS packages you will find a world of information that can cover almost any situation for your business. This tool can be used in any business and it provides …
SSIS is a very basic, developer-oriented ETL tool and while it lacks many of the nice UX features of its competitors it is a powerful tool that comes as a part of SQL Server and, in the hands of experienced developers with domain knowledge, can meet most organizations' ETL …
SSIS and Denodo differ in their approaches to ETL and Data integrations. SSIS is more affordable from a cost and licensing perspective (if you have Microsoft licensing), but Denodo is no slouch. If you go with Denodo, you are not creating data, there are pros and cons to …
SQL Server Integration Services does a good job for our SQL Server environments and was selected for that reason. For a SQL Server-only implementations, I would recommend SQL Server Integration Services. When we compared SSIS to other ETL providers against SQL Server, SSIS was …
Informatica Powercenter is the centerpiece of our overall enterprise data warehouse strategy. It's a critical enablement to ensure we can feed in multiple data stream and transform them into digestible data within our data warehouse. With its flexible capabilities and API availability, we were able to feed in industry standard data format as well as home grown data structure. Overall, we are very pleased with their capability and contribution to our data warehouse strategy.
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.
One of the challenges of PowerCenter is the lack of integration between the components and functionality provided by PowerCenter. PowerCenter consists of multiple components such has the repository service, integration service, metadata service. Considerable time and resources were required to install and configure these components before PowerCenter was available for use.
In order to connect to various data sources such as Netezza database or SAS datasets, PowerCenter requires the installation and configuration of separate plug-ins. We spent considerable time trouble-shooting and debugging problems while trying to get the various plug-ins integrated with PowerCenter and get them up and running as described in the documentation.
PowerCenter works well with structured data. That is, it is easy to work with input and output data that is pre-defined, fixed, and unchanging. It is much more difficult to work with dynamic data in which new fields are added or removed ad-hoc or if data format changes during the data ingest process. We have not been as successful in using PowerCenter for dynamic data.
One of the challenges of learning PowerCenter is that it is difficult to find documentation or publications that help you learn the various details about PowerCenter software. Unlike SAS Institute, Informatica does not publish books about PowerCenter. The documentation available with PowerCenter is sparse; we have learned many aspects of this technology through trial and error.
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.
The tool is very flexible and will meet most, if not all, of your data transformation needs. It is an expert-level tool, so building your knowledge-base and user-base (and keeping that base healthy!) is very important. But it will pay off with strong data management and the ability to leverage that data in ways you haven’t thought of yet. Bottom line, data is money, and PowerCenter helps you monetize your data.
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.
Positives; - Multi-user development environment. - The speed of transformation. - Seamless integration with other Informatica products. Negatives; - There should be fewer windows, to maintain developers' focus while using. You probably need two big monitors when you start development with Informatica Power Center. - Oracle Analytical functions should be natively used. - E-LT support as well as ETL support.
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.
Informatica power center is a leader of the pack of ETL tools and has some great abilities that make it stand out from other ETL tools. It has been a great partner to its clients over a long time so it's definitely dependable. With all the great things about Informatica, it has a bit of tech burden that should be addressed to make it more nimble, reduce the learning curve for new developers, provide better connectivity with visualization tools.
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.
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
Basically the two solutions have, more or less, the same functions and features.The difference, for me, is that ThreatQuotient make more features over the security and I think is oriented to a SOC enviroments. InformaticaExchange Connectors is oriented to the quality, integration and distribution of the data in order to ensure the reliability and access of data from different sources, as well as the integration in a single repository of enterprise data (External/internal)
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.
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.