In partnership with
Find out why 1M+ professionals read Superhuman AI daily.
In 2 years you will be working for AI
Or an AI will be working for you
Here's how you can future-proof yourself:
Join the Superhuman AI newsletter – read by 1M+ people at top companies
Master AI tools, tutorials, and news in just 3 minutes a day
Become 10X more productive using AI
Join 1,000,000+ pros at companies like Google, Meta, and Amazon that are using AI to get ahead.
In the past couple of years, Apache Iceberg has emerged as one of the hottest technologies in big data. It’s essentially a new way to manage huge datasets on a data lake with the reliability of a data warehouse. Originally developed at Netflix, Iceberg became an open source Apache project that tackles many long-standing pain points of data lakes.
What Iceberg brings to the table format:
ACID transactions on data lakes: Iceberg allows multiple writers and readers on files in cloud storage (e.g. S3) without conflicts. It has a table metadata layer that tracks changes as atomic snapshots. This means you can insert, delete, and update data on a data lake reliably – something that older Hive tables or plain Parquet files couldn’t guarantee. No more corrupted data due to half-finished writes or clunky Hive lock mechanisms.
Time Travel and Snapshots: Every change in Iceberg creates an immutable snapshot. You can query data as of a previous point in time with a simple SQL clause. This is incredibly useful for audits, reproducing experiments on past data, or recovering from accidental deletions. For example, you might run:
SELECT * FROM sales_table FOR TIMESTAMP AS OF '2025-01-01';to see the state of the table at the start of the year. Such time-travel queries give data lakes abilities that once only fancy versioned warehouses had.Schema Evolution done right: Iceberg lets you alter table schemas (add/drop columns, rename, change types) in a way that is safe and doesn’t require rewriting all your data. It handles column mapping under the hood so that readers don’t break when schema changes. Evolving data models over time becomes much less painful.
Partitioning and Performance: Iceberg introduces hidden partitioning and indexing features that improve query performance. You can partition your table by time, category, etc. for skipping irrelevant data, but Iceberg abstracts it so queries don’t need to hard-code partition filters. It also tracks column-level stats (min/max values per file), helping query engines prune data quickly. The result is data-lake queries that run closer to warehouse speed.
Open Standard, Multi-Engine: Perhaps the biggest appeal: Iceberg is an open table format not tied to any single vendor or engine. You can have Spark, Trino/Presto, Flink, Hive, or even DuckDB all read the same Iceberg table via the Iceberg API. This interoperability is a key piece of the “lakehouse” vision – you store data once in an open format and query it with the tools of your choice. No lock-in to a proprietary format. Iceberg tables are basically Parquet/Avro files plus some metadata; many systems can collaborate on them.
All these features position Iceberg as a foundational layer for the next generation of data platforms. It promises the best of both worlds: the scale and cheap storage of a data lake with the manageability and query-ability of a data warehouse. No surprise, then, that industry leaders are rallying behind it. In 2024 we saw a flood of support: Snowflake announced support for Iceberg tables (via their new Polaris catalog), Google BigQuery added native Iceberg table support, AWS is building Iceberg into its S3 data lake offerings, and even Microsoft Fabric introduced “Iceberg links” for integration. Meanwhile, Databricks (champion of the rival Delta Lake format) acquired an Iceberg-focused company (Tabular) – perhaps acknowledging that the open table format wave is inevitable. This broad vendor support suggests Iceberg is becoming the industry standard table format, with momentum surpassing earlier alternatives like Hudi or Delta.
In short, the promise of Iceberg is very appealing: an open, future-proof way to manage massive datasets, with broad ecosystem buy-in. It’s often described as a key to “data architecture modernization” or making your data lake into a true lakehouse. No wonder many technology roadmaps list Iceberg adoption as a goal.
(Diagram suggestion: An architecture diagram could be shown here, illustrating a data lakehouse: Cloud object storage at the base, an Iceberg table layer on top managing metadata, and multiple query engines (Spark, Trino, Flink, etc.) connected to that Iceberg table. This would visualize Iceberg’s role as the hub enabling a flexible, multi-engine data stack.)
The Hard Part: Few Teams Are Actually There Yet
For all the excitement, there’s an open secret: relatively few organizations have Iceberg running in production for their core workloads (outside of tech giants). Many data teams are experimenting or running pilot projects, but not as many have fully replaced their existing warehouse or Hive-based data lake with Iceberg. This reality-check is reminiscent of the early 2010s with Hadoop – everyone talked about it, far fewer truly tamed it for business value. Let’s explore why Iceberg adoption is challenging:
1. Operational Complexity & New Skills Required: Adopting Iceberg isn’t as simple as swapping out a file format. It introduces a whole metadata management layer (the Iceberg catalog) that you must run and maintain. You’ll need somewhere to host the Iceberg Catalog – options include Hive Metastore, AWS Glue, a relational database, or new services like Nessie/Project Arctic. Each has its quirks and none are as plug-and-play as one might hope. For instance, major cloud vendors have each pushed their own Iceberg catalog flavors (AWS Glue vs. Snowflake Polaris vs. Databricks Unity Catalog, etc.), which can lead to compatibility headaches and some vendor lock-in. If you’re not deeply familiar with these catalog services, you face a steep learning curve. Moreover, Iceberg works best with streaming or frequent batch jobs to compact files, expire old snapshots, and so on. Setting up those maintenance jobs (often using Apache Spark) requires expertise in infrastructure-as-code, monitoring, and troubleshooting – a level of data platform maturity that many smaller teams don’t yet. In short, Iceberg moves some complexity from the query engine into the data layer itself, and you as the data team have to manage that.
2. Not a “drop-in” replacement: If you already have a data warehouse or an established Hadoop-based lake, migrating to Iceberg is a project. You have to rewrite or adapt pipelines to use Iceberg SDKs or SQL extensions, set up new workflows for things like MERGE/UPDATE via Iceberg, and thoroughly test everything. It’s doable – and there are tools emerging to help (even some that use AI to assist in SQL translation) – but it’s a significant effort. This means the bar to justify Iceberg is high: you need to be convinced that the benefits (e.g. lower cost, better performance, openness) outweigh the migration cost and risk. Many teams might find that their current solution, while not perfect, is “good enough” for now, so Iceberg becomes one more shiny object on the backlog.
3. Cautionary Tale of Hadoop: Experienced data engineers have not forgotten the Hadoop era lesson. Back then, companies rushed to adopt Hadoop-based data lakes (often on-premises) because it was the hot thing – only to realize they weren’t equipped to manage the complexity. A small team might set up Hadoop, Hive, Pig, Mesos, etc., and suddenly have an enormous ops burden without clear ROI. Andrew Jones recently reflected on this, recalling how his team jumped on Hadoop years ago and drowned in complexity that “didn’t solve any of the problems we had”. They spent time babysitting infra rather than delivering value. He draws a parallel to today’s Iceberg hype, saying “Iceberg is cool tech... but I’m not yet certain Iceberg solves the problems most of us have. Just like Hadoop didn’t.”. This is a powerful perspective: if your data problems are modest (e.g. a few TB of data, a single source of truth, well-served by an existing warehouse), introducing Iceberg might be over-engineering. You could end up with a complex system solving a scale of problem you don’t actually face, while creating new problems (maintenance, bugs, etc.) for yourself.
4. Ecosystem Maturity and Tooling Gaps: Iceberg is still fairly new, and while core support is growing, some ecosystem tools are catching up. For example, not all BI tools natively understand Iceberg time-travel or snapshots. You might have to wait for drivers or connectors to fully support Iceberg in your favorite dashboard tool. Data cataloging and lineage tools might not fully integrate with Iceberg’s metadata yet. The developer experience is improving but can be rough – managing dev/test Iceberg environments, performing local testing, etc., require some custom setup. Compare this to a cloud data warehouse where a lot of things are turnkey. The relative newness of Iceberg means early adopters sometimes have to be “toolmakers” and solve edge issues themselves, which not every team has appetite for.
5. Caution around Vendor Fragmentation: The fact that every vendor is doing something with Iceberg is a double-edged sword. Yes, there’s broad support – but each one’s solution has slight differences. If you use Snowflake’s Iceberg mode, or Amazon’s Athena Iceberg, are you truly avoiding lock-in? There might be proprietary integrations or limitations. The dream of easily moving an Iceberg table from one platform to another without any friction is not fully realized yet. Companies worry (perhaps rightly) that “open” could become “semi-open” in practice, if they lean too heavily on one cloud’s flavor of Iceberg. This can make some teams hesitant to jump in now – they prefer to wait and see the community converge on standards (for catalogs, for example).
Now, it’s not all gloom. Many of these challenges are being actively addressed by the community and vendors:
Managed Iceberg services are popping up – e.g. vendors like Tabular (pre-acquisition) and AWS’s forthcoming offerings – which aim to handle the hard parts (metadata catalogs, compaction, etc.) as a service. This could lower the operational burden on teams adopting Iceberg (for a fee, of course).
Improved tooling is coming – from easier ways to ingest data into Iceberg tables (avoiding the Spark cluster just to write data) to better UIs for monitoring Iceberg table health.
Success stories are accumulating, which provide blueprints. Netflix and Apple (early Iceberg adopters) demonstrated it at massive scale. Adobe has spoken about using Iceberg in their lakehouse. Each year of experience shared helps newer teams avoid pitfalls.
Still, as of 2025, the reality is that Iceberg is largely in the hands of early adopters and pioneers, while the mainstream is cautiously evaluating. One industry newsletter succinctly noted: “Apache Iceberg offers a powerful approach to modern data lakehouses, addressing many limitations of Hadoop-era solutions, but it’s not a silver bullet. Organizations must carefully evaluate their needs, resources, and operational capabilities before embarking on an Iceberg journey.”. In other words, proceed with caution and clarity rather than blind hype.
How to Explore Iceberg Adoption (Carefully)
If you determine that the benefits of Iceberg likely align with your needs, how should you go about adopting it? Here are some strategic tips to consider:
Identify the Use Cases Where Iceberg Shines: Don’t try to “Iceberg all the things” initially. Pick a specific problem that Iceberg solves for you. For example, maybe you have a large event data lake that multiple pipelines need to update concurrently (Iceberg’s ACID can help), or you want to enable time-travel queries for data science reproducibility. Having a clear, concrete goal will drive a focused adoption instead of a nebulous overhaul.
Start with a Pilot Project: Stand up Iceberg in a dev or test environment first. Perhaps carve out one data domain or a subset of tables to convert to Iceberg. This lets your team get familiar with the format and operations (snapshot management, schema evolution, etc.) in a low-risk way. It also helps expose any integration issues with your existing tools on a small scale.
Use Managed Catalogs if Possible: One tricky part is the catalog (metadata store). If you’re on AWS, for instance, you might leverage AWS Glue as the Iceberg catalog since it’s a managed Hive Metastore. Or if on Snowflake, you might try their Polaris catalog for Iceberg. Using a managed service can spare you from running your own catalog service initially. Just be mindful of potential lock-in if you go this route.
Automate Maintenance Early: Iceberg tables require periodic maintenance (compacting small files into bigger ones, expiring old snapshots to reclaim space, etc.). Set up these processes from day one of your pilot. It’s best to automate compaction jobs (maybe using Apache Spark or Flink) and test that you can successfully prune snapshots without breaking data. Getting this right in pilot will prevent unpleasant surprises in prod.
Ensure Team Skill Readiness: Upskill your data engineers on Iceberg concepts. Simple training on how partitioning works in Iceberg, how to rollback a table to a prior snapshot, and how to use Iceberg SQL extensions will go a long way. You may also want to engage with the community (Slack channels, forums) – the Iceberg community is active and can help with troubleshooting.
Plan Governance & Data Quality from the start: Incorporate Iceberg into your data governance regime. Treat the Iceberg catalog as a critical component – back up your metadata store, secure it (only authorized services should commit to tables), and audit changes. Also consider how you’ll monitor data quality in an Iceberg world: you might implement checks to ensure that the number of files or snapshot age doesn’t grow beyond thresholds (to prevent performance issues).
Consider Phased Rollout: Even if the pilot is a success, plan a gradual rollout. Maybe the next step is to use Iceberg for new datasets or pipelines, while leaving existing ones on old tech until Iceberg proves itself. Over time, migrate more datasets as confidence grows. There’s no rule that you must migrate everything to Iceberg all at once (or ever). You could run a hybrid model with some Iceberg tables and some older Hive or warehouse tables side by side for quite a while.
The overarching advice is: be deliberate and incremental. As one Iceberg expert advises, “Start small, test thoroughly, automate aggressively, and prioritize data governance” when introducing Iceberg. That way, you reap Iceberg’s benefits in a controlled manner and avoid repeating the painful lessons of past over-hyped tech.
Takeaways for Data Leaders
Apache Iceberg is a game-changer for building an open lakehouse – when you truly need it. Its features (ACID transactions, schema flexibility, time-travel queries) solve real problems that plagued the old Hadoop/Hive world, enabling data lakes to behave much more like warehouses. The vision of querying huge cloud data repositories with multiple engines, seamlessly and reliably, is closer than ever with Iceberg.
The hype is justified, but so is the caution. Virtually every major data platform added Iceberg support or integrations in the past year (Snowflake, Dremio, DataBricks), signaling that Iceberg (and similar open table formats) are likely here to stay as the future standard. However, many organizations have not rushed to put it in production, remembering how adopting complex tech without a clear need can backfire. Iceberg is powerful, but not a “silver bullet” for every team’s data woes.
Don’t adopt Iceberg just because “Netflix did it.” Assess your own scale and requirements. If you’re struggling with data reliability on a data lake, or need multi-engine access to data, or are hitting limits in a cloud warehouse, Iceberg could be the solution. But if you have a well-oiled warehouse that meets your SLAs, switching to Iceberg for its own sake might introduce more risk than reward. As one engineer put it: Iceberg solved problems at Netflix… but it may not solve the problems most of us have. Align the tech to your problem, not vice versa.
If you do proceed, invest in doing it right (or wait for managed options). Successful Iceberg adoption demands data engineering maturity – infrastructure to handle the metadata and job orchestration, and people who know how to tune and troubleshoot it. Consider using managed services or cloud integrations to reduce the heavy lifting. And absolutely enforce good governance from day one (e.g., don’t treat the data lake as a free-for-all just because Iceberg adds a safety net). A well-run Iceberg deployment can unlock tremendous flexibility, but a poorly run one can become a tangled mess. Discipline and automation are key.
The lakehouse future is coming – slowly but surely. Even if you delay on Iceberg now, keep an eye on the trend. The industry is moving toward separating storage and compute with open formats. In a few years, you might adopt Iceberg or a similar table format as they become more turnkey. Being conceptually ready (and not too tied to proprietary formats) will ease that transition. Meanwhile, you can gain experience by trial projects or using Iceberg in targeted ways (for example, for a specific ML feature store, or a data sharing use case) to build internal know-how.
Closing Thoughts: Apache Iceberg represents the ambition of data teams to have their cake and eat it too – the scale of data lakes with the orderliness of warehouses. That’s a compelling vision, and likely an enduring one. But adopting any new paradigm comes with effort and risk. By learning from the past and approaching Iceberg pragmatically, you can avoid the icebergs beneath the surface (pun intended). In the end, whether Iceberg becomes a cornerstone of your data platform or just a tool in your toolbox, the key is to stay flexible and informed. Here at NextGen Data, we’ll continue to cut through the hype and share real-world perspectives on technologies like this – helping you make the best decisions for your data strategy.