Overall Satisfaction with Apache Airflow
We use apache airflow as part of our DAG scheduler and health monitoring tool. It serves as a core component in ensuring our scheduled jobs are run, the ability to allow us to inspect jobs successes and failures, and as a troubleshooting tool in an event of job errors/failures. It has been a core tool and we are happy with what it does.
- Job scheduling - Pretty straightforward in terms of UI.
- Job monitoring - Dashboard is as straightforward as it gets.
- Troubleshooting jobs - ability to dive into detailed errors and navigate the job workflow.
- UI/Dashboard can be updated to be customisable, and jobs summary in groups of errors/failures/success, instead of each job, so that a summary of errors can be used as a starting point for reviewing them.
- Navigation - It's a bit dated. Could do with more modern web navigation UX. i.e. sidebars navigation instead of browser back/forward.
- Again core functional reorg in terms of UX. Navigation can be improved for core functions as well, instead of discovery.
- It is a good workflow job scheduler.
- It meets all, if not most of our organization product requirements.
- AirFlow stability in terms of the product reliability is unmatched.
- Jenkins and Apache Kafka
Using Jenkins and Kafka, it is not for the same purpose, although it might be similar. I would say AirFlow is really what it says on the can - workflow management. For our organisation, the purpose is clear. So long your aim is to have a rich workflow scheduler and job management, AirFlow is the go-to. Use the tool for what it's meant for, and it will meet your need for sure.
Do you think Apache Airflow delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Apache Airflow's feature set?
Yes
Did Apache Airflow live up to sales and marketing promises?
I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process
Did implementation of Apache Airflow go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Apache Airflow again?
Yes