It lacks so many improvements and advancements since the ancient version it was forked at, but because AWS already has an org's payments details, teams often refuse to look at Elasticsearch.
Even basic things like autocompleting queries have been WIP for half a decade now:
https://github.com/opendistro-for-elasticsearch/sample-code/...
https://github.com/opensearch-project/OpenSearch-Dashboards/...
The superiority AWS was slinging when they "bravely" took the mantle looks terrible in retrospect
Also you can just keep your data in postgres and use paradedb and stop having to deal with dramatically more expensive infrastructure and the JVM.
Just use this pre-V1 public beta software I stumbled upon instead.
The narrative that opensearch is some kind of unsafe abandonware is clearly nonsense when you read the commit log: https://github.com/opensearch-project/OpenSearch/commits/mai...
All I can say is, sure, if you want elastic use elastic.
…but opensearch is fine. I use it and have no problem with it.
"It lacks so many improvements and advancements since the ancient version it was forked at"
to "opensearch is some kind of unsafe abandonware"?
Would love to learn the thought process here.
…but I mean, I’m not really up for playing the “pedantically correct about what he/she said” game with you.
Instead how about you comment on the point I’m actually making, which is:
opensearch is perfectly fine for most people.
For most people, there is no meaningful distinction between elastic and opensearch.
Opensearch is a healthy project which regularly receives updates and is widely used in production in large deployments.
If you have any meaningful or compelling argument why any of those three things is not true by all means, I’d love to hear about it.
> Also you can just keep your data in postgres and use paradedb and stop having to deal with dramatically more expensive infrastructure and the JVM.
That was the comment I replied to. If you thought OpenSource was pre-V1 public beta software I'm not sure why you're even opining on this.
> Is the idea that opensearch is not usable in production
No one said it's not usable in production.
> because of missing autocomplete?
We have an operations team that wants to do searches across 200+ fields for an embedded device's logs. The engine supports it just fine, but what kind of UX is it to expect them to do manual lookups of the fields available?
People with simple use cases of course can't imagine how important discovery features are.
Of course those aren't all the parity gaps, a random sampling of the ones I banged my head against:
- No Log Stream view, also critical for observability operations with any semblance of a reasonable UX
- No wildcard type, critical for machine generated logs having sane searchability. Searches are literally broken otherwise by false negatives.
- No nested fields in visualizations, can't visualize properly structured logs.
- Can't change indexes on visualizations, need to recreate the entire visualization.
- Can't use underscores at the start of a field name.
- Doesn't support auto refreshing fields which again, is terrible for embedding device logging
Elastic moved past basic search since the days OS forked it at, and now it's a genuinely nice choice for observability.
There's a literal report I wrote on the gaps there to justify going to Elastic before giving up on our slow RFP process. Every gap no matter how small is representative of what's wrong with OpenSearch: they don't have 1/10th the incentive to actually put comparable resources to Elastic behind it.
Especially when you have people lining up to make excuses based on the fact they're clueless about the gaps between them. Literal droves of people using it to provide a middling search experience to their users just don't see anything wrong with it.
> Even basic things like autocompleting queries have been WIP for half a decade now.
It's an open-source project. If this bothered you for half a decade, you could always submit a patch.
Apparently it didn't bother enough other people that no one cared to send a patch.
1. I'm not using Mac-jail-OS
2. I'm not insane to even remotely consider the possibility of using Windows
So, yea, I'm using OpenSearch.
It's not exactly a niche utility for observability unless you plan on hand searching hundreds of fields. But of course see my other comment for a list of the other observability fumbles they've made.
Elastic chose a pretty great time to start to give observability attention, and OS didn't keep up there. Meanwhile search is becoming more and more focused on integrating semantic search (which Lucene isn't particularly excellent at)