Your CRM, ERP, and product database each report a different number, so every board pack starts with days of manual reconciliation in spreadsheets. Relevant Software builds custom data warehouses around your actual sources — taking you from scattered sources to one source of truth where the numbers already match.
Not sure whether you need a new warehouse, a migration or better models on the one you have? Start with consulting. We map your sources and reporting needs, look at what your current setup does well and where it breaks, and give you a recommendation with the budget and timeline behind it.
Assessment of your current warehouse, sources and reports
Build, migrate or modernize: a recommendation with the reasoning written down
Budget and timeline estimate for the next step
Data warehouse architecture design
Architecture design turns your source landscape, data volumes, and reporting needs into a documented blueprint: storage and compute layers, integration patterns, and the trade-offs behind each choice.
Target architecture diagram with the reasoning written down, not just the result
Platform evaluation scored against your workloads, budget, and compliance constraints
A cost model for the first year of running the warehouse, before you commit to it
Data modeling
Your business logic becomes a data model analysts can actually read: entities, metrics, and definitions agreed once and enforced everywhere, ready for data analytics and BI teams to build on.
Dimensional or Data Vault model matched to how your teams query, with documentation
One agreed definition per metric, so “revenue” means the same thing in every report
A semantic layer that lets BI tools and future AI workloads share the same logic
ETL and ELT pipeline development
Pipelines move data from your CRM, ERP, product databases, and third-party APIs into the warehouse on schedules your reporting can rely on. High-volume sources — event streams, IoT feeds, raw logs — run through big data services, so the warehouse stays the modeled core rather than the processing engine.
Ingestion pipelines with monitoring and alerting, so failures surface before users notice
Transformation logic in version control with code review, like any production software
Data quality checks at every stage, from source extract to published table
Why choose Relevant for data warehouse development
A roadmap you can take into budget decisions
Every engagement starts with a costed, phased build roadmap — sources, architecture direction, and a realistic first release — with dates per stage instead of one distant deadline.
AI-assisted delivery with senior review
The Relevant AI Delivery Framework™ cuts delivery time by up to 50% with up to 20% fewer bugs through AI-assisted development — with every release still passing senior code review.
Certified security and compliance
ISO 27001-certified processes, with GDPR and HIPAA compliance built into the architecture from the first design review.
On-time delivery you can plan around
99% of projects delivered on time — warehouse launches you can put in front of the board with a date attached.
A stable team across the engagement
96% employee retention means the engineers who design your architecture are still there to build, launch, and support it.
The whole data practice in-house
Data engineering, data analytics, and BI under one roof, with no subcontracting — the model, pipelines, and dashboards come from one accountable team.
How a data warehouse development engagement works
A source-system audit with a scoped backlog
Your sources, their owners, and the reports the business actually asks for go into a single inventory. You get the inventory, the gaps, and a scoped first-release backlog. If the priorities behind the warehouse are still contested, data strategy consulting settles them before the backlog is committed.
An architecture blueprint sized to your workloads
The blueprint fixes the platform, layers, and integration patterns against your data volumes and budget. Yours to challenge before a line of pipeline code is written.
A data model your analysts can read
Business entities and metric definitions take shape as a documented model, reviewed with the people who will query it. Sign-off happens here, while changes are still cheap.
Pipelines running against your production sources
Ingestion and transformation go live source by source through our data engineering services — each with monitoring and quality checks attached, and every merge passing senior review. Pipelines land in your version control as they’re finished.
A launch with numbers reconciled to source
Load and failure testing runs in a staged environment against your projected peak, and warehouse figures are reconciled against source systems line by line. The reconciliation report is part of the delivery.
A handover your team can run
Runbooks, access, and a working session with the people who take over. Support continues at whatever level you choose — from on-call to full operation.
The architecture behind every warehouse we build
Technologies we use for data warehouse development
Warehouse & lakehouse platforms
Snowflake, Google BigQuery, Databricks, Amazon Redshift, Microsoft Fabric, ClickHouse
Nataliia DynkaClient Partnership DirectorNelia MorozykHead of Sales Operations
Frequently asked questions
We run on spreadsheets and a production database today. Are we ready for a data warehouse?
Readiness shows up in symptoms before it shows up in strategy. Run three checks today:
Count your data sources — at three or more, manual consolidation starts costing more than it saves.
Count the hands a report passes through before anyone trusts it — every manual step is payroll spent on copying, and an error waiting for the board pack.
Ask two people to compute the same KPI independently — if the answers differ, a warehouse is already being built by hand, at the most expensive rate possible.
Three or more sources and two or more manual steps is the point where a built warehouse costs less than the spreadsheet operation it replaces.
How long does it take to build a data warehouse from scratch?
The timeline has a fixed part and a variable part. The fixed part is predictability: the build roadmap sets dates per stage, and 99% of projects deliver on the dates it commits to. The variable part depends on three numbers you already have: how many source systems feed the warehouse, how much transformation your metrics need, and how many teams consume the output. Builds release in stages, so the first reliable dashboards arrive while later sources are still being connected. Pull those three numbers together before talking to any vendor — a partner who can’t turn them into a phased timeline with dates is guessing.
What drives the cost of data warehouse development?
Five variables set most of the budget:
the number of source systems;
data volume;
the complexity of your business logic;
compliance requirements;
how much your own team takes on.
All five can be pre-computed before talking to anyone: list the sources, estimate the largest tables, count the metrics with contested definitions, name your regulator, and decide who operates the result. Those five answers turn a scoping call from a sales pitch into an estimate — contact uswith them, and you’ll get a range against your numbers instead of a padded quote.
Can you finish a warehouse another vendor or our own team started?
Inherited builds are a regular engagement shape, and they rarely require starting over. What happens first is an audit: the existing model, pipeline code, and documentation get assessed against what the business needs the warehouse to answer. A useful check you can run today — ask for the data model documentation; if the only documentation is the SQL itself, budget for the audit but not necessarily for a rebuild. Most inherited warehouses keep their platform and most of their pipelines, and get a corrected model and testing they never had.
Will the warehouse support AI and ML work later?
A warehouse decides more about an AI roadmap than the models do. AI work needs the same things good reporting needs — documented definitions, traceable lineage, reliable freshness — plus room for unstructured data and feature pipelines when they arrive. A build that treats those as architecture requirements from day one won’t need replacing when the first ML use case lands.
Run one check today: take the AI use case closest to funding and list the data it needs; if nobody can name which system each field lives in and who owns it, the first project is the warehouse, not the model.
How do you make sure warehouse numbers match our source systems?
Trust in a warehouse dies the first time finance spots a mismatch, so reconciliation is a deliverable, not a courtesy. Warehouse figures get compared to source systems line by line before launch, the comparison is documented, and the checks stay in place as automated tests that run after every change. Run your own version any time: pick one KPI, compute it in the source system, and trace it through to the dashboard. If nobody can walk you through that path, the numbers match by luck. Reconciliation proves the numbers once; keeping them trustworthy as sources and teams change is an ongoing discipline, and data management covers the ownership rules, quality standards, and audit controls that hold after launch.
Do we need our own data team to run the warehouse after launch?
Not on day one. Handover includes runbooks and training, so a single technically-minded owner can operate a well-built warehouse day to day; what genuinely needs engineering time is change — new sources, new metrics, growing volumes. If you’d rather not build that capability in-house, ongoing AI-powered data engineering services cover pipeline maintenance, new-source onboarding, and cost tuning at whatever level of involvement you choose.
Do we bring in individual engineers, or hand the whole build to a team?
A full build pod runs five roles: a data architect on the model and platform, a data engineer on pipelines, an analytics engineer turning raw tables into the metrics your reports use, a data platform engineer on environments and provisioning, and a BI developer on the dashboard layer.
Both staffing shapes work for filling them; the signal is who owns the outcome. If your own data lead runs the architecture and needs senior hands, individual engineers embed into your squad and work in your process. If the warehouse itself is the deliverable — architecture, model, pipelines, launch — a dedicated teamtakes it end to end, with a roadmap and dates per stage. A practical way to decide today: name the person in your company who will answer for the warehouse in a year. If that person exists and is an engineer, embed specialists. If the answer is “nobody yet,” a dedicated team with a handover plan is what closes that gap.
Insights from our experts
Tech label
13 mins
Healthcare
15 mins
Tech label
16 mins
One source of truth starts with one call.
Cloud data warehouse development
Builds run on Snowflake, BigQuery, Amazon Redshift, and Databricks, engineered so cloud spend stays predictable as data volumes grow.
Warehouse configured for your query patterns, with compute that scales down as well as up
Storage layout and partitioning designed against your largest tables, tested at volume
Cost guardrails and usage monitoring from day one
Enterprise data warehouse development
An enterprise data warehouse consolidates data across departments and subsidiaries into a governed platform that survives audits and reorganizations alike.
Multi-domain model with ownership and access rules mapped to your org structure
Row- and column-level security aligned with GDPR, HIPAA, or your industry regulator
Lineage and audit trails, so any number can be traced back to its source
Hybrid data warehouses
Data residency rules and sector regulation sometimes decide the architecture before preferences do — banking, healthcare, and public-sector builds often keep part of the estate on your own infrastructure.
Hybrid architecture with a documented split: what stays on-premises and why
The same modeling, testing, and governance discipline as our cloud builds
A migration path designed in, so a later move to cloud is a decision
A raw zone that keeps every record as it landed, replayable when a definition changes later
A conformed zone where duplicates are resolved and two systems describing one customer agree
Business marts where each metric carries one definition, with a semantic layer above them
Transformation written as version-controlled code and tested at each boundary between zones
Governance across every layer: catalog, lineage, access control, masking, quality tests, alerting