Apache Flume vs. Cloudera Manager

Apache Flume is well suited in small batch and near real time processing projects, taking data from one point to another with local processing (I mean not external enrichment).
Filtering, transforming and multiple push destinations are common grounds for Flume.
It is not so nice to use if your data needs external enrichment (taking data from external databases or web services), as transactions and (micro)batches may lead to reprocessing and it relies upon the application to avoid duplicates.

Incentivized

Cloudera Manager is well suited for environments and deployments where the administrator user base is not well versed in the Apache Hadoop ecosystem or the Linux command line interface.

Incentivized

• Multiple sources of data (sources) and destinations (sinks) that allows you to move data form and to any relevant data storage
• It is very easy to setup and run
• Very open to personalization, you can create filters, enrichment, new sources and destinations

Incentivized

• Cloudera Manager has an easy to use web GUI. You can start and stop cluster and services. It will start and stop services in a cluster in the right order. You can monitor the cluster, services, and physical host hardware as well.
• Cloudera Manager has an easy to use API that allows us to create scripts to automate deployment process.
• Cloudera Manager has an option to add additional services that you could manage via the web GUI.

Incentivized

• It is very specific for log data ingestion so it is pretty hard to use for anything else besides log data
• Data replication is not built in and needs to be added on top of Apache Flume (not a hard job to do though)

Incentivized

• Support for third-party Python APIs within Cloudera Manager extension framework
• Providing more reporting/logging functionality as part of the open source distribution
• Support for the latest RHEL versions sooner in the release lifecycle

Incentivized

It meets all my customer's needs.

Incentivized

Apache Flume is open-source so support is limited. Never the less, it has great documentation and best practices documents from their end-users so it is not hard to use, setup and configure.

Incentivized

Apache Flume is on par with Scribe with similar functions. Apache Kafka is a generation purpose while Apache Flume is specific to log aggregation. Google Pub/Sub and IBM MQ are costlier than Apache Flume ( open source ) and have a lot more cost associated with them. Apama Streaming Analytics and Tibco Steaming are more comprehensive streaming solutions than Apache Flume so for deeper performance guarantees, it is easier to use Apache Flume.

Incentivized

I have not used any competitors, such as Hortonworks, because Cloudera Manager just works and meets all my customer's needs. I only have deployed Hadoop using command line, which is not easy to use and manage.

Incentivized

• Positive impact on ROI due to a reduction in manual labor to generate and maintain compliance reports based on logs.
• Positive impact on the business objective by reducing the need for provisioning compute for log aggregate IT stack in advance but adding on an as-needed basis.

Incentivized

• Cloudera Manager has allowed our organization to deploy Apache Hadoop to operations quicker and with less training versus using the command line exclusively.
• Increased employee efficiency.
• Increased product adoption.

Incentivized