Book a demo

When You Need More Than Just a Data Diff

Data diffing is a tool, not the goal

Five years ago not many people had heard of data diffs. Now when you search for “data diff,” you find many products like, dbt-audit-helper, Datafold, Metaplan, and SQLMesh have also introduced data diffing features.

What sets Recce apart is how data diff is used, not just that we offer it.

People want data diffs because they want to understand the full impact of code changes and then make decisions with that knowledge. That’s why Recce treats diffing as a tool, not an outcome. You start with exploration leveraging column-level lineage, Breaking Change Analysis, and then use data-diffing when it adds clarity, not confusion.

What data diff doesn’t tell you

Data diffing is a powerful feature, but it’s doesn’t show you the whole picture nor is it always the best approach. If you rely on data diffing alone, you’ll run into these common issues:

Diffing results create noise

A diff only shows you something changed, but not why, or what to do next.

Not all differences are problems. Without context, diffing generates false alerts that demand attention but not action. Sometimes a change is intentional and correct, but the system still flags it.

Overwhelming scope

Small updates early in a DAG can cause all downstream data to have differences, even when most don’t matter.

Reviewing every downstream diff creates unnecessary noise and extra work. You end up spending more time reviewing unnecessary tables than understanding impact.

Sometimes, the goal is no difference

This one’s easy to overlook, but it matters.

Often, especially early in the DAG, you’re just checking that things didn’t break. A row count diff is a simple way to confirm there’s no silent fan-out or missing data. In these cases, no difference is exactly what you want to see.

The hidden costs of diff-everything

It’s costly and time-consuming

Even diffing two views can trigger heavy compute on large datasets. Multiply that across all modified models in a deep DAG, and costs escalate fast. Auto-diffing without guardrails doesn’t just waste time; it quietly drains your budget.

It requires upfront configuration

Accurate data diffing requires defining a primary key or unique identifier. In many data projects, especially early-stage or exploratory ones, this isn’t always feasible or even available.

There are often better (and cheaper) alternatives

In some situations, data diff is overkill.

Instead of comparing every row, you might get the answers you need faster through:

Human-in-the-loop + Automation

Recce offers a data diffing feature, but its power lies in how it fits your workflow.

Recce puts exploration before automation. You explore first, then decide where and when to diff. The diff result is meant to guide a thoughtful, human-in-the-loop review, not trigger a costly automated diffing of everything that changed.

With tools like Lineage Diff for scoping the impacted area of your DAG, Breaking Change Analysis, column-level navigation, and data diffing, Recce helps you focus on what’s really impacted.

Once you’ve validated what matters, then you can choose to automate those checks across all pull requests with continuous integration. This standardizes your review workflow, reduces unnecessary alerts, and ensures critical issues are caught early before hitting production.

And over time, the human decisions made during these reviews become shared organizational knowledge. They stay with the team, long after any one person moves on.

You don’t need more diffing. You need better understanding

Data diffing provides outputs, not an outcome. It should be used as a means to support confident and contextual data change review.

Use Recce if you want to:

Recce lets you evaluate data in context before production and ship working data faster, turning the data deployment process from frustrating overhead into a competitive advantage.

Get Recce updates in your inbox

Interested in data best practices and Recce usage tips?