cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Data Engineering
Join discussions on data engineering best practices, architectures, and optimization strategies within the Databricks Community. Exchange insights and solutions with fellow data engineers.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

AWS SageMaker to the Azure Databricks.

thewfhengineer
New Contributor III

I'm starting a project to migrate our Compliance model - Python code (Pandas-based) from AWS SageMaker to the Azure ecosystem.

Source: AWS (SageMaker, Airflow)
Target: Azure (Databricks, ADLS)

I'm evaluating the high-level approach and would appreciate your guidance. The core options I'm considering are:

  1. Lift & Shift: Minimal code changes, focusing on getting it running on Databricks quickly.

  2. Refactor & Modernize: Adapting the code to leverage native Azure/Databricks capabilities (like Spark) for better long-term performance.

What are your thoughts on the best path forward?

Can you share your experiance ?

#sagemaker #aws #migration

1 REPLY 1

mark_ott
Databricks Employee
Databricks Employee

For migrating a Python/Pandas-based compliance model from AWS SageMaker/Airflow to Azure Databricks/ADLS, the best approach depends on priorities like speed, risk, cost, and future scalability. Both "Lift & Shift" and "Refactor & Modernize" have clear trade-offs that should be evaluated in the context of your business needs and long-term goals.

Lift & Shift

  • Pros

    • Fastest migration: You can quickly get your existing code running with minimal changes, allowing for rapid testing and deployment on Azure Databricks.

    • Lower immediate risk and effort: Familiarity with the existing codebase makes troubleshooting easier.

    • Simplified rollback: If issues arise, you can revert to AWS more easily since core functionality remains unchanged.

  • Cons

    • Limited scalability: Pandas operations are in-memory, which doesn't leverage Spark's distributed computing.

    • Higher long-term operational costs: Databricks pricing is better optimized for Spark workloads, not for Pandas jobs.

    • Missed Azure-native optimizations: You won’t benefit from performance improvements and integrations available with Spark, ADLS, or MLflow.

Refactor & Modernize

  • Pros

    • Performance boost: Migrating Pandas code to PySpark or Koalas unlocks better scalability for large datasets through distributed processing.

    • Enhanced maintainability: Aligning with Databricks best practices and Azure-native features supports future-proofing and easier integration with ADLS, Delta Lake, and MLflow.

    • Cost-effectiveness at scale: More efficient resource utilization on Databricks and easier management of data pipelines.

  • Cons

    • Increased migration time and complexity: Significant code rewrites, team upskilling, and validation effort required.

    • Higher upfront investment: More design, testing, and documentation compared to Lift & Shift, delaying deployment and ROI.

Recommendation

If your goal is rapid migration and validation, Lift & Shift is reasonable for initial deployment, especially if you’re constrained by time or resources. However, for sustainable operations and scalability, Refactor & Modernize offers better long-term value by fully leveraging Azure Databricks and ADLS capabilities. Many organizations blend both strategies: start with Lift & Shift for quick wins, then iteratively refactor critical components to Spark/Delta Lake as business needs grow.

Key Advice

  • Assess data size, workflow complexity, and compliance requirements before deciding.

  • Identify high-value pipelines or bottlenecks for targeted modernization.

  • Plan for change management, team training, and thorough testing.

  • Document the migration approach for auditability and future optimization.

By balancing immediate needs with long-term strategy, you can minimize disruption while maximizing your investment in Azure’s ecosystem.