Choosing the right type of embedding for your use case

Learning Center Articles
, , ,
1

If you want to embed QuickSight into your application, you’ll find that Amazon QuickSight provides a variety of options:

  1. You can embed a whole dashboard,
  2. Or just a single visual,
  3. Or the QuickSight Q bar to allow your users to ask questions with natural language.
  4. You can also embed the QuickSight console to allow your authors to create their own dashboards from within your application.

A big question asked by our customers is whether they should choose anonymous embedding or user-based embedding.
If you have the same question, then this article walks through some of the things you need to consider as you make that decision.

Let’s start with the difference between anonymous and user-based embedding.

Simply put, anonymous embedding is for when your application doesn’t need a registered QuickSight user to access QuickSight content.

This could mean that you don’t manage your users at all (in the case where you are providing your dashboard on a public facing website for anyone to consume).
Or, it could mean that you manage your users logging into your application but you don’t want or need to additionally manage your users in QuickSight.

User-based embedding is for when your users accessing QuickSight content are managed in QuickSight.

So how do you know if you need to manage your users in QuickSight?

image
image790×918 46.1 KB

Let’s start with the questions around the features you want to use.

  • If you want to allow your customers to create their own dashboards within your application, you’ll need user based embedding as only registered authors can create & own assets in QuickSight.

  • On the security side, if you want to use column-level security, then users need to exist within QuickSight.

    • Note that, fine-grained row-level security (that allows you to create AND and OR logic in your rules) is now supported for both user-based and tag-based RLS, with tag-based rules supporting anonymous embedding use-cases

  • In terms of cost optimisation, user pricing caps the cost of QuickSight readers each month, so regardless of usage, you know what the maximum cost will be.
    The alternative is capacity pricing, with commitment plans that can provide lower per session costs. However, with capacity pricing, reader costs are not capped, therefore higher than expected usage could result in greater cost.

  • Finally, your cost analysis may reveal that one pricing model is preferred to the other. For example, if you have a small number of readers, capacity pricing may not be cost-optimal. However, if your application is large-scale and supports many users, capacity pricing can deliver lower prices per session and also avoids the overhead of managing users in QuickSight.

For further information about how to embed QuickSight, please review these resources:

See also these videos from the Amazon QuickSight YouTube Channel

Many Thanks,
Andrew & Steph

2 Likes