Apache Hive is database/data warehouse software that supports data querying and analysis of large datasets stored in the Hadoop distributed file system (HDFS) and other compatible systems, and is distributed under an open source license.
N/A
Google BigQuery
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Google's BigQuery is part of the Google Cloud Platform, a database-as-a-service (DBaaS) supporting the querying and rapid analysis of enterprise data.
$0.04
Pricing
Apache Hive
Google BigQuery
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Standard edition
$0.04 / slot hour
Enterprise edition
$0.06 / slot hour
Enterprise Plus edition
$0.10 / slot hour
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache Hive
Google BigQuery
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache Hive
Google BigQuery
Considered Both Products
Apache Hive
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Apache Hive
To query a huge, distributed dataset, Apache Hive was built by Facebook. Unlike Apache Hive, Apache Spark is an in-memory computation engine, which is why it is significantly quicker than Apache Hive at querying large amounts of data. In contrast to Apache HBase, Apache Hive is …
Community support and ease of use -not deployment.
It enables querying and analyzing large amounts of data stored in HDFS, on the petabyte scale. It has a query language called HQL that transforms SQL queries into MapReduce jobs that run on Hadoop, and it is wonderful for the …
Apache Spark is similar in the sense that it too can be used to query and process large amounts of data through its Dataframe interface. Hive is better for short-term querying while Spark is better for persistent and long-term analysis. Another product is Impala. For our …
We have used a simple but necessary function such as merging certain data tables, which although they may be from different areas, complement each other or are necessary, you can use metadata if what you need is to validate the origin of your information and what impact it has, …
Apache Hadoop is built on top of the Hadoop File system so it gives its best when integrated with Hadoop. Data analysis and query optimization become very easy when used with Hadoop to perform Extract transform load operations. As Hadoop is a big data system and handles large …
We have used the system to migrate data either for new versions or because we will use another operating program, the software helps us to synchronize programs between different operating systems, a history of information can be kept constant, it can be sent to third parties …
Queries are easy to write and interface is similar to SQL so learning overhead is reduced. Multi user and data type support is provided. Can be easily scaled for very large amount of analytics. It is very flexible in terms of using file formats.
Apache Hive is a query language developed by Facebook to query over a large distributed dataset. Apache is a query engine that runs on top of HDFS, so it utilizes the resources of HDFS Hadoop setup, while Apache Spark is an in memory compute engine, and that's why [it is] much …
Besides Hive, I have used Google BigQuery, which is costly but have very high computation speed. Amazon Redshift is the another product, I used in my recent organisation. Both Redshift and BigQuery are managed solution whereas Hive needs to be managed
Hive and Spark have the same parent company hence they share a lot of common features. Hive follows SQL syntax while Spark has support for RDD, DataFrame API. DataFrame API supports both SQL syntax and has custom functions to perform the same functionality. Spark is faster and …
One of the major advantages of using Presto or the main reason why people use Presto (Teradata) is due to that fact it can support multiple data sources - which is lacking as in the case of Apache Hive. But still, most people who come from a Structured data-based background …
Easy to understand, well supported by the community, good documentation. However, it is possible that SAP Business Warehouse could be a good fit, too, even maybe better. I did not have the chance to try it though. We selected Apache Hive because it was far less expensive and …
For storing bulk amount of data in a tabular manner, and where there's no need need of primary key, or just in case, if redundant data is received, it will not cause a problem. For small amounts of data, it does run MR, so beware. If your intention is to use it as a …
I wasn't part of the evaluation process for Apache Hive. This was already implemented when I joined the company. I have worked with other big data plaftforms and I personally thinks most of them are quite comporable to one another. It really depends on what the company is going …
Apache Pig is probably the most direct technology to compare to Hive and has several different use cases to Hive. If you want to simplify processing tasks that run using MapReduce then Apache Pig may be a better tool for the job. However if you are going to be running many …
is much better as it’s easily accessible provides velvet documentation and fulfils all our needs as well as easily integrated into clients, environment
Google BigQuery is simpler and I say it has simpler UI too. If you have a clear long term ask , mainly business intelligence needs then Google BigQuery offers you good. If you need too much of features under a single cloud and you are ok to be lil clumsy then you can check …
I have used most of the data analytics platforms. Based on my work, I have found that the user interface of Google BigQuery is simple to navigate. I like the front view - ease of joining tables, and integration with other platforms.
Compared to every other analytics DB solution I've used, Google BigQuery was by far the easiest to set up and maintain, and scale. The price was also much lower for our use case (internal data analysis).
For our usage, Google BigQuery is cheaper and more performant. The others have their place, but in certain scenarios, Google BigQuery is a better solution.
We actually use Snowflake and BigQuery in tandem because they both currently meet various needs. Redshift, however, has barely been used since our migration away from it. In the case of both Snowflake and BigQuery, they beat Redshift by a long shot. The main reasons are their …
I came to use BigQuery from a traditional system like MS SQL server, the features which are available in BigQuery as a cloud service far outweigh the features from SQL server. I have not used other similar tools like Amazon Redshift but Google BigQuery serves multiple use cases …
Google BigQuery is cheaper and much faster as compared to both. While as compared to Snowflake , we tested it was faster and cheaper by 30%, that is after Snowflake tweaked their environment, if not for that it would have been 90% cheaper than snowflake. Redshift is not easy …
In my opinion, Google BigQuery is custom made to be the best data lake system that is easy to use, scalas to fit any business size, has inbuilt security, as well as tools for data integrity. Although a few other tools have some of the same functionality, Google BigQuery is the …
It's easier to connect data between BigQuery and looker studio instead of connecting the data between BigQuery and tableau in terms of data explore or dashboard creating. Therefore we are considering migrating dashboards from tableau to looker studio for the whole company. On …
When comparing Google BigQuery and Databricks, both platforms are powerful tools for managing and analyzing large datasets. BQ is ideal for businesses requiring large-scale analytics, reporting, and dashboarding with minimal operational overhead. It’s also great for ad-hoc …
Google BigQuery's main advantage over its direct competitors (Amazon Redshift and Azure Synapse) is that it is widely supported by non-Google software, while the others rely heavily on their own cloud ecosystems.
I have used other data manipulation tools like SQL Server and Google BigQuery feels more intuitive, Google provides so much documentation and tutorials that getting to know the software is not only easy but even satisfactory, so I'd say Google BigQuery is very superior to that …
Amazon Redshift was a likely alternative we were considering , but it needs to be provisioned on cluster and nodes, which increases infrastructure management, whereas Google BigQuery is serverless, so no infra management :) Also, I remember when comparing them we did found out …
Google BigQuery as a platform allows for more integrations and customizability than many other offerings. Users mostly need to understand the basics of database and SQL programming in order to get the most from the product. However, other products like Hevo do have less of a …
There are some areas in which this product is better while there are some in which others do better. It's not like Google BigQuery surpasses them in every metric. For a holistic view, I will say we use this because of - scalability, performance, ease of use, and seamless …
The data performance of Google BigQuery is best as per other software. Limitations on Google BigQuery's data size are superior to those of Microsoft SQL. Obtaining real-time data from several IoT devices is another benefit.
I personally find it by far simpler than Amazon redshift due it's onboarding seamlessness. For a quick start and simplify tye access to read the data big query provide better user experience and a smoother user interface. More importantly, the fact that Big Query can be easily …
BigQuery can automatically scale to accommodate the data and query load, providing potentially unlimited scalability. At the same time, Redshift requires manual scaling efforts to increase or decrease capacity, which might affect performance during scaling operations.
We focused more on data volume and less on full application capabilities. All in all, we found that the two solutions complement each other. For integration, some sources were better handled in SAP HANA, particularly other SAP systems where Google Big Query was more suitable …
SingleStore has a much lower query latency compared to BigQuery. Thus, we segregate faster tasks to SingleStore, and use BigQuery has our main database to store all historical data.
Google BigQuery i would say is better to use than AWS Redshift but not SQL products but this could be due to being more experience in Microsoft and AWS products. It would be really nice if it could use standard SQL server coding rather than having to learn another dialect of …
First and foremost, Google BigQuery's pricing structure, based on data processing and storage, is more cost-effective for our needs. Secondly, since we already use other Google Cloud services, its tight integration with them especially, with Cloud Storage and Dataflow was a big …
Apache Hive shines for ad-hoc analysis and plugging into BI tools. Its SQL-like syntax allows for ease of use not for only for engineers but also for data analysts. Through our experience, there are probably more desirable tools to use if you are planning on integrating Hive into your processing pipeline.
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.
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.
Hive is a very good big data analysis and ad-hoc query platform, which supports scaling also. The BI processes can be easily integrated with Hadoop via the Hive. It can deal with a much larger data set that traditional RDBMS can not. It is a "must-have" component of the big data domain.
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.
Apache Hive is a FOSS project and its open source. We need not definitely comment on anything about the support of open source and its developer community. But, it has got tremendous developer support, awesome documentation. I would justify the fact that much support can be gathered from the community backup.
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.
We have used a simple but necessary function such as merging certain data tables, which although they may be from different areas, complement each other or are necessary, you can use metadata if what you need is to validate the origin of your information and what impact it has, is also feasible.
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.
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.