Apache Pig is best suited for ETL-based data processes. It is good in performance in handling and analyzing a large amount of data. it gives faster results than any other similar tool. It is easy to implement and any user with some initial training or some prior SQL knowledge can work on it. Apache Pig is proud to have a large community base globally.
Google BigQuery is great for being the central datastore and entry point of data if you're on GCP. It seamlessly integrates with other Google products, meaning you can ingest data from other Google products with ease and little technical knowledge, and all of it is near real-time. Being serverless, BigQuery will scale with you, which means you don't have to worry about contention or spikes in demand/storage. This can, however, mean your costs can run away quickly or mount up at short notice.
Iterative Development - you can write aliases/variables, which are not immediately executed and these are stored in a DAG, which is only evaluated upon dumping or storing another alias.
Fast execution - Works with MapReduce, Tez, or Spark execution frameworks to provide fast run times at large scales.
Local and remote interoperability - Scripts that depend on testing a small dataset locally before moving to the full thing can simply be done with "pig -x local."
Its serverless architecture and underlying Dremel technology are incredibly fast even on complex datasets. I can get answers to my questions almost instantly, without waiting hours for traditional data warehouses to churn through the data.
Previously, our data was scattered across various databases and spreadsheets and getting a holistic view was pretty difficult. Google BigQuery acts as a central repository and consolidates everything in one place to join data sets and find hidden patterns.
Running reports on our old systems used to take forever. Google BigQuery's crazy fast query speed lets us get insights from massive datasets in seconds.
It is challenging to predict costs due to BigQuery's pay-per-query pricing model. User-friendly cost estimation tools, along with improved budget alerting features, could help users better manage and predict expenses.
The BigQuery interface is less intuitive. A more user-friendly interface, enhanced documentation, and built-in tutorial systems could make BigQuery more accessible to a broader audience.
We have to use this product as its a 3rd party supplier choice to utilise this product for their data side backend so will not be likely we will move away from this product in the future unless the 3rd party supplier decides to change data vendors.
web UI is easy and convenient. Many RDBMS clients such as aqua data studio, Dbeaver data grid, and others connect. Range of well-documented APIs available. The range of features keeps expanding, increasing similar features to traditional RDBMS such as Oracle and DB2
I have never had any significant issues with Google Big Query. It always seems to be up and running properly when I need it. I cannot recall any times where I received any kind of application errors or unplanned outages. If there were any they were resolved quickly by my IT team so I didn't notice them.
I think Google Big Query's performance is in the acceptable range. Sometimes larger datasets are somewhat sluggish to load but for most of our applications it performs at a reasonable speed. We do have some reports that include a lot of complex calculations and others that run on granular store level data that so sometimes take a bit longer to load which can be frustrating.
BigQuery can be difficult to support because it is so solid as a product. Many of the issues you will see are related to your own data sets, however you may see issues importing data and managing jobs. If this occurs, it can be a challenge to get to speak to the correct person who can help you.
It takes me less time to write a Pig script than get a Spark program running for batch ETL workloads. Compared to Spark, Pig has a steeper learning curve because it employs a proprietary programming language. In one script and one fine, it can handle both Map Reduce and Hadoop. It has a large amount of documentation available to make learning more convenient.
Google BigQuery of course collects a much much larger array of raw data and can handle (practically) an unlimited amount of data. For a large enterprise like ours that relies on large-scale analytics, this is absolutely imperative. Google BigQuery can also combine GA4 data with external sources (like CRM tools), so our analytics can be unified. Due to our heavy reliance on GA4, Google BigQuery is the natural choice since it is a Google product and has better integration.
We have continued to expand out use of Google Big Query over the years. I'd say its flexibility and scalability is actually quite good. It also integrates well with other tools like Tableau and Power BI. It has served the needs of multiple data sources across multiple departments within my company.
Return on Investments are significant considering what it can do with traditional analysis techniques. But, other alternatives like Apache Spark, Hive being more efficient, it is hard to stick to Apache Pig.
It can handle large datasets pretty easily compared to SQL. But, again, alternatives are more efficient.
While working on unstructured, decentralized dataset, Pig is highly beneficial, as it is not a complete deviation from SQL, but it does not take you in complexity MapReduce as well.
In some places, Google BigQuery has helped us save some money by avoiding the need for expensive infrastructure and reducing some of the operational costs.
Scalability is up-to-date and really helpful in multiple places.
Knowledge transfer is easy as it is very user-friendly, so the learning curve has been reduced.
Also, it gives us more insights from our data, helping us make smarter decisions for our business.
