Workbench

Jane_B

Hello All,

I am new to Domo. My organization is looking to install workbench. I feel like we should install 2.0 the web version as different team members may need to back each other and run the jobs we set up. I am trying to do a pro and con list of 2.0 and 5.2. Does anyone have any feedback they can share on these versions? Thanks!

ArborRose

Workbench 2.0 (Web-Based Version)

Pros:

1. Accessibility:
   • Accessible from any device with internet access, making it easier for teams to collaborate and support each other.
   • No need to install or maintain local software.
2. Centralized Management:
   • Jobs and configurations are stored in Domo's cloud, reducing dependency on specific machines or users.
   • Facilitates version control and consistent updates to jobs.
3. Collaboration-Friendly:
   • Multiple users can view and manage jobs seamlessly, allowing for better teamwork and accountability.
4. Automatic Updates:
   • The web-based system ensures you're always using the latest version without manual installations.
5. Simpler Setup:
   • Fewer dependencies, no software conflicts, and no need to configure on local machines.

Cons:

1. Performance:
   • May rely on stable internet connectivity, and large data uploads could be slower compared to a desktop version running locally.
2. Limited Advanced Features:
   • Some advanced features or configurations available in the desktop version might not yet be supported.
3. Potential Learning Curve:
   • Transitioning teams familiar with the desktop version might require additional training to adapt to the web interface.

Workbench 5.2 (Desktop-Based Version)

Pros:

1. Full Feature Set:
   • Offers advanced job configurations and customizations that may not be available in the web version.
2. Local Control:
   • Runs directly on local servers or desktops, which may result in better performance for large-scale data jobs.
3. Offline Capabilities:
   • Can manage jobs without relying on a constant internet connection (until data needs to sync with Domo).
4. Mature Product:
   • Has been in use for a longer period, meaning it may be more robust for certain use cases.

Cons:

1. Collaboration Challenges:
   • Jobs are tied to the local installation and machine, making it harder for teams to collaborate unless they share credentials or manually migrate jobs.
2. Maintenance Overhead:
   • Requires installation, updates, and troubleshooting on each machine where it's used.
   • Dependency on individual machines or users who set up the jobs.
3. Scalability Issues:
   • Scaling the number of users managing jobs can become cumbersome as it’s not designed for multi-user environments.
4. Security Risks:
   • Local installations increase the risk of misconfigurations or data exposure if not carefully managed.

Recommendations

If your organization values collaboration, centralized access, and ease of use, Workbench 2.0 is likely the better choice. It is especially useful if your team anticipates multiple people needing to manage and monitor jobs, or if you'd like to avoid the hassle of maintaining software on multiple machines.

On the other hand, if advanced features, local control, or handling large data volumes are critical to your operations, Workbench 5.2 may still have an edge.

Hybrid Approach

Some organizations choose to start with 2.0 for simplicity and later transition to desktop Workbench 5.2 for specific advanced use cases. You could also run both in parallel, leveraging 2.0 for most jobs and 5.2 for niche scenarios.