feqgmmr2

3 ms·

1.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
I think it's important to understand how this kind of scenario comes up. It's unusual to want to move a whole PB at one time, and yeah in that case these other costs would come up. Problem is, the cost is more insidious than that.
2.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
It's very relevant if you ever want to do serious ML or anything other than SQL. Of course Snowflake wants you to think that you never need another platform. Every customer knows that's not the case.
3.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
This is exactly what FAANGs do with their data platforms. There are literally hundreds of groups within these companies with very strict data isolation requirements between them. Pretty sure something like that is either already possible or
4.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
It is not a "small" cost. The cost is proportional to the size of the data exported. For all intents and purposes, large amounts of data are locked into Snowflake. Is it theoretically possible to export a petabyte out of SF? Sure.
5.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
Do you have to pay to export data out of Snowflake? Yes. They have a nice guide on how to spend money doing it ( https://docs.snowflake.com/en/user-guide/data-unload-overvie ...). Do you have to pay to export data o
6.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
Spark has always been able to handle way larger scale than any DW.
7.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
The 'open' here refers to the data. Delta lake can be read/written by multiple open source engines, not just Spark. Not to mention, if you want you can use Databricks with Parquet, though the experience won't be as good.
8.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
If you want Python, ML and SQL to be easily usable together on the same data nothing can touch Databricks.
9.
by feqgmmr2 5y ago
The thing is even that response doesn't show them to be better. As someone pointed out, they're comparing their cheapest offering with Databricks' most expensive one and saying they're 3% better in price-perf. What does