22 ms·

Open Distro for Elasticsearch

• gtsteve 8y ago
  For further reading, this is also mentioned in the AWS blog: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elastic...
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  • jeffbarr 8y ago
    Thanks for sharing; I wrote the post and also submitted the distro to HN. In most cases (apparently per HN policy), blog posts that announce new services are removed in favor of direct links to the offering.
    • karussell 8y ago
      Is it really honest to say "Keeping Open Source Open"? Elasticsearch is 100% open source, even Apache Licensed, and you are implying that this is not the case "somehow". Sure "security" is missing, but who says that this has to be part of the open source project "Elasticsearch"? Maybe it would be more honest to say "Forcing open source backing companies to avoid open core that is hated by AWS" ;) ? (btw: I'm not associated with Elastic except loving their open source projects)
      • karussell 8y ago
        Ah, I probably did not correctly catch the news: > Unfortunately, since June 2018, we have witnessed significant intermingling of proprietary code into the code base. And you mean the x-pack stuff? https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/master/LICENSE.txt https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/master/LICENSE... Interesting, wasn't aware of it.
• mosselman 8y ago
  'Distro' makes it sound like a linux-distribution with, in this case, Elasticsearch installed on it. From what I read on the page and on the aws blog this is not the case though?
  • alexose 8y ago
    I thought the same thing. After some searching I realized that "Open Distro" isn't actually a linux distro after all. This is a non-fork release of Elasticsearch with the proprietary parts stripped out.
    • sam_lowry_ 8y ago
      Thanks for figuring it out. Shame on the publishers of the OP website for making it deliberately unclear.
      • tylersmith 8y ago
        In what why did they deliberately make the meaning unclear? The middle of the page says "An Apache 2.0-licensed distribution of Elasticsearch". It's saying in black and white that it's a distribution of Elasticsearch, not of an operating system. In what way is being deliberatly unclear?
        • _msw_ 8y ago
          Hi, I work at AWS on compute services, but spent a lot of my life building Linux distros. For those of us with Linux distro building experience, this may be initially confusing. But calling a curated collection of software a "distro" has been used for decades outside of Linux distributions. For example, there are multiple distributions of TeX, like TeX Live, MacTeX, etc. http://www.tug.org/interest.html#free http://www.tug.org/interest.html#free See also the Anaconda Distribution for Python and R: https://www.anaconda.com/distribution/ https://www.anaconda.com/distribution/ (not to be confused with the Anaconda that I know and love: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaconda_(installer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaconda_(installer) )
• a012 8y ago
  What do they use for Alerting? IIRC Alerting with Elasticsearch 6 is available on Enterprise edition, not OSS. And what the OS under it actually?
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  • sciurus 8y ago
    They're using https://github.com/opendistro-for-elasticsearch/alerting https://github.com/opendistro-for-elasticsearch/alerting The main selling point of the project is providing open source alternatives to features that Elastic has kept proprietary.
• Mizza 8y ago
  This is an interesting new "threat" to the "open core" business model. ES makes proprietary extensions to support their FOSS core product - then a tech behemoth clones these features for their own hosted service, but makes them Free as well. Good for the consumer, but bad for the company that originally created the core FOSS technology and best for Amazon. Have there been any examples of this happening before?
  • sl1ck731 8y ago
    The whole MongoDB thing recently. And it doesn't appear that AWS is hosting these right now, just distributing so they must be paying some kind of licensing for ES. But I'm sure that will change.
    • Mizza 8y ago
      The blog post says that some of these features now appear in ESS (AWS hosted ES), and that the rest will arrive soon. Did AWS do the same thing with Mongo?
      • sl1ck731 8y ago
        They created a compatible hosted database. I believe in response to some licensing changes MongoDB made, so the AWS service targets the last permitted license release by Mongo. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-amazon-documentdb-with-mongodb-compatibility-fast-scalable-and-highly-available/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-amazon-documentdb-with-... *I forgot to mention, they did not release the code for this as you may have been looking for apple-to-apple comparison with the ES situation.
        • _msw_ 8y ago
          Hi, I work at AWS on Compute services, but not directly on database services. I also work on broader open source topics at Amazon. Amazon DocumentDB was in development for a long time, and development started well before any of the license changes that MongoDB (the company) made to MongoDB (the database).
• drkrab 8y ago
  How is elastic (the company) going to make a business going forward? I would expect that selling these enterprise add-ons (or similar ones) is a significant part of their revenue.
  • baud147258 8y ago
    It depends on how much revenue elastic is getting from their hosted offering and support contracts.
• david_p 8y ago
  For those curious: - the website is copyrighted to Amazon Web Services - all commits in the github repositories are made by AWS staff.
  • scarhill 8y ago
    > all commits in the github repositories are made by AWS staff. Given that it was just made public this morning, it would be surprising if it were otherwise. The real question is what the contribution model looks like going forward. The blog post says "Contributions are welcome, as are bug reports and feature requests"[1], but of course the devil is in the details. 1 - https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elastic...
• softwarelimits 8y ago
  Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, it would be of extraordinary interest to I believe many people in our industries if anybody with some production experience on the topic would like to write a short comparison "Elasticsearch vs. Solr", thank you very much for your attention!
  • QuinnyPig 8y ago
    Great idea—thanks!
  • joking 8y ago
    In most cases it's just a matter of preference. Elastic has some extra tools like kibana an was more focused on having statistics and aggregations working well, while Solr webui is a lot more complete than the elastic one and the full text search and relevance bits are more explained. Internally both use lucene, so you are going to be able to do the same things with both. I worked extensively with both and I prefer the way of administering Solr. Anyway I use Elastic when it involves logging and statistics thanks to kibana.
  • softwarelimits 8y ago
    meanwhile there is this: http://solr-vs-elasticsearch.com/ http://solr-vs-elasticsearch.com/ But some real war stories would make the comparison much more enjoyable...
  • otisg 8y ago
    Here is one good comparison from Sematext (Sematext provides both Solr and Elasticsearch consulting, support, and training, so we are familiar with both Solr and ES and have no horse in the race): https://sematext.com/blog/solr-vs-elasticsearch-differences/ https://sematext.com/blog/solr-vs-elasticsearch-differences/
• rooam-dev 8y ago
  IMHO using "open" is just strategy to attract devs and companies that are looking for FOSS solutions, but in reality it's just another way to vendor lock-in. I hope i am wrong. Honest question, besides not paying licenses, is there any technical reason to do this?
  • phamilton 8y ago
    If you are using AWS ESS I would imagine using this distro locally and in testing will be a closer match to what's running in prod.
    • rooam-dev 8y ago
      Exactly my point. Most likely it will be more difficult migrate to the "normal" ES.
      • tracker1 8y ago
        As long as this remains cleanly open, I'm not sure why you wouldn't run this if you want to self-host. I'm not sure how this will, or won't play out for Elastic company though. I'm thinking AGPL for server, and MIT for client libraries is probably the best way to go for someone starting any kind of *Server project. Open-Core as a business model isn't something that the likes of AWS, Azure or GCP can really tolerate if they want to integrate SaaS that the customers want. DBaaS in particular is one of the bigger advantages of cloud providers in general. Discloser: A family member of mine does work for Elastic, but I have no knowledge of their internal practices or policies or reaction to this.
  • sl1ck731 8y ago
    I was trying to implement ES previously but kept running into things I thought we're included "open source" but turned out to be an extra paid feature. With this I know what I'm getting. There is no more vendor lock-in with this than with Elastic.
    • rooam-dev 8y ago
• pauldix 8y ago
  This is a very surprising move from AWS. In the past they haven't seemed to be willing to contribute to the OSS that they pick up and host. Even though they claim they'll contribute changes upstream, I doubt that Elastic would accept changes that are competitive with their commercial offerings. So you effectively get a fork. I think this is a win for the Elastic community as a whole, but presents a real problem for Elastic the company. And that begs the question of what happens to the Elastic community if there's a real fork. And what happens if Elastic the company is very negatively impacted? Do we see a fracture of the community? Looking even farther out, at this point does it make sense for any startup looking to create infrastructure software to open source it? If their project becomes successful, they'll get eaten up by the hosting providers. It makes smaller scale open source more commercially viable because you won't attract the attention of the providers that would come in a take your business. Will be interesting to at least watch what early stage VC investment in open source companies looks like over the next 12-24 months. Will the open source pitch work for series A investments or will investors shy away?
  • otisg 8y ago
    > This is a very surprising move from AWS. I wonder why you say that? It's kind of obvious that somebody was going to do it sooner or later to protect themselves, no? Perhaps fearing the license change? > So you effectively get a fork. Yup, I assume that will happen, too.
    • pauldix 8y ago
      Oh I assumed that someone would do it. I just didn't expect it to be AWS. Elastic is popular enough and the core open source license permissive enough that I expected some sort of fork eventually. The license of the original project is an important factor in this. For example, I wouldn't expect a fork of MongoDB because of the limitations of the AGPL license make it less appealing. With that case I'd expect what AWS already did, which was to create an API compatible system. Also notable is that they're not open sourcing that. With Elastic, this looks like it's half marketing on AWS' part. They want to start repairing their image in the OSS world so they say they're doing this for the community.
• otisg 8y ago
  My Twitter followers include a lot of Elasticsearch and Solr users. It will be interesting to see what they think of this from their POV as users... https://twitter.com/otisg/status/1105146138921979905 https://twitter.com/otisg/status/1105146138921979905
• sciurus 8y ago
  AWS explains their rationale at https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/keeping-open-source-open-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/keeping-open-source-... . Here's a snippet" " Unfortunately, since June 2018, we have witnessed significant intermingling of proprietary code into the code base. While an Apache 2.0 licensed download is still available, there is an extreme lack of clarity as to what customers who care about open source are getting and what they can depend on. For example, neither release notes nor documentation make it clear what is open source and what is proprietary. Enterprise developers may inadvertently apply a fix or enhancement to the proprietary source code. This is hard to track and govern, could lead to breach of license, and could lead to immediate termination of rights (for both proprietary free and paid). Individual code commits also increasingly contain both open source and proprietary code, making it very difficult for developers who want to only work on open source to contribute and participate. In addition, the innovation focus has shifted from furthering the open source distribution to making the proprietary distribution popular. This means that the majority of new Elasticsearch users are now, in fact, running proprietary software. We have discussed our concerns with Elastic, the maintainers of Elasticsearch, including offering to dedicate significant resources to help support a community-driven, non-intermingled version of Elasticsearch. They have made it clear that they intend to continue on their current path. "
  • alittletooraph 8y ago
    The commercial entities associated with the most popular open source technologies are taking measures to protect themselves from Amazon simply taking their software and turning it into a service, whether it's introducing proprietary components or new licensing. Wouldn't be surprised if we saw AWS do something similar for Redis, MongoDB, Kafka, etc.
    • koolba 8y ago
      > Wouldn't be surprised if we saw AWS do something similar for Redis, MongoDB, Kafka, etc. They started on their own Redis fork a while ago as ElastiCache has had baked in SSL for over a year and half now. While it's possible they've added it via an stunnel type software stop it, I'd bet for efficiency and simplicity it's baked into their internal fork: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/amazon-elasticache-now-supports-encryption-for-elasticache-for-redis/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/amazon-elasticache-now...
• oldpond 8y ago
  I find it very ironic that AWS is behind this. Whenever I buy books from Amazon I am amazed at their broken search engines. Just search a topic on Amazon and then try to sort the results. LOL.
  • tracker1 8y ago
    IIRC, most of that infrastructure is/was Oracle based and much of it going to another DB. I'm not sure if Elastic is even in the mix, or how well it scales to Amazon's levels.
    • gtsteve 8y ago
      Given the age of the offering, it might actually be the CloudSearch [0] product that is used by the Amazon.com search team. FWIW, I've always found the Amazon store search to be pretty decent; normally I don't use a website's built in search system, opting for Google instead. [0] https://aws.amazon.com/cloudsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/cloudsearch/
• kristoff_it 8y ago
  "The maintainers of open source projects have the responsibility of keeping the source destination open to everyone and not changing the rules midstream." Since when is anybody entitled to any free software. Projects can do what they want with their code, and while free software (the Stallman kind) is nice, if projects cite you as the main reason for their change of direction, you are intellectually dishonest if you just blame them for not being willing to do volunteer work (for you) anymore. This, to me, looks like an abusive "look what you made me do".
  • unethical_ban 8y ago
    No one has to "not be a dick" but the world is better when you try for the goal. What the blog is saying is "If you build an open source tool and people put their time and effort to using it, closing more and more of the toolset to paid add-ons isn't cool". AWS just said "Hey, we can build those ourselves and give back to the community". They volunteered and made it happen.
    • anth_anm 8y ago
      They just said "Fuck you, we have more money so we own you now".
• olavgg 8y ago
  Question, can I checkout the code from Github and build it with ./gradlew assemble as Apache License 2 or do I need to delete some modules before doing that?
• eric_b 8y ago
  I dunno if I'd be long $ESTC at this point. Elastic took $162 million in venture funding before IPOing. In the last year their Operating Income was -$43 million. A lot of that is sales/marketing related, but at some point they need to make a profit. This open distro is certainly not going to help. As someone who's worked at many big corps on Elasticsearch installs, I've been worried about them pushing away from OSS for some time. Many big corps want some of these "Enterprise" grade features Open Distro is offering, and if Elastic doesn't already have a foothold in them, I wager they'll be using this instead of paying. As an aside, how come people still think these Open Source/Core commercial businesses are viable? We've seen time and again that once commercialization occurs, the OSS stuff goes right out the window. (RedHat, Docker, MongoDB, Sentry etc)
  • kapilvt 8y ago
    Just commenting on the aside, we should be careful about painting with an overly broad brush. Each of these companies and organizations is different, at least two you've mentioned are fully opensource afaik not open core (Redhat and Sentry). Redhat continues to do tons of opensource work across many ecosystems, kubernetes, linux kernel, gnome, etc. The Redhat sw model isn't open core, because what they sell isn't proprietary afaict its a support with updates model, that they also distribute under a different brand then the opensource (fedora/centos/openshift okd). Additionally we're talking about a multi-billion dollar company, seems like a success to me. For Sentry, their more focused on Saas platform, but afaics an on premise distribution model doesn't reference a commercial product thats differential to their opensource repos aka its not open core, afaics. [update] sentry on premise install docs https://docs.sentry.io/server/installation/ https://docs.sentry.io/server/installation/
    • eric_b 8y ago
      RHEL, as far as I know, is not available as a nice installable package without a subscription, at least to run in production. CENTOS was started as a separate entity to make bundling the RHEL source in to easily installable distributions more straightforward, as Red Hat made it difficult. As far as Sentry, I'm referring to the fact that they have not cut a release of their on-premise in some time, and features have started to diverge, though they assert they will reach parity with on-prem "at some point" https://forum.sentry.io/t/when-will-a-new-version-be-tagged-for-sentry-open-source/5622/10 https://forum.sentry.io/t/when-will-a-new-version-be-tagged-... (Though again, like RedHat, the source is technically available...) My main point is that OSS is at odds with making money.
• sidi 8y ago
  This is a good project to happen, and kudos to AWS for doing this! However, like some in the thread, I suspect AWS has been building this for a while for their own product and Elastic's license change may have influenced the decision to open-source. Getting a good out-of-the-box granular security has been a long overdue pain point with ElasticSearch, there have been good alternatives for the other problems it is replicating. 1.) ElastAlert - https://github.com/yelp/elastalert https://github.com/yelp/elastalert for alerting, 2.) ElasticSearch SQL - https://github.com/NLPchina/elasticsearch-sql https://github.com/NLPchina/elasticsearch-sql for writing SQL queries. Would very much like to hear from OP why these weren't contributed to instead of creating another alternative. We've been working on a similar project in Golang and now well may be as good a day to open-source and put it out there: https://github.com/appbaseio/arc https://github.com/appbaseio/arc. It's an extremely light-weight API gateway for ElasticSearch that at the core comes with an out-of-the-box security system based on users and permissions (set granular ACLs, Rate Limits, TTL) inspired from a proprietary security system we built over the past year - https://appbase.io/features/security/ https://appbase.io/features/security/.
  • edraferi 8y ago
    According to the release blogpost [0], "SQL Support [...]is an improved version of the elasticsearch-sql plugin." They're not replacing the SQL extension you linked -- they're integrating it. [0] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elastic...
    • sidi 8y ago
      That's definitely good to read. And gathering from other comments, they have done something similar for Security too. :-)
• sailfast 8y ago
  As an active developer and maintainer of a cluster, I strongly disapprove of this move by AWS. By forking on an earlier instance of the codebase for ES and Kibana they're not only creating an open source version of the code but also attempting a fork of the community - plugin developers, user groups, etc. It's extremely frustrating. EDIT: If folks actively building plugins have felt pain here because of decisions by Elastic, then my view on this point changes considerably, obviously. I find it very hard to believe there was no compromise to be had here between the current Elastic roadmap for their product and their previous work. How is this good for users of the current tools? How does this help create better capabilities on a common platform? Will this encourage users to build businesses on elasticsearch open source elements? I'm not sure where the community ends up after this, so I'm not sure I can support by using AWS' elasticsearch tools.
  • sidi 8y ago
    As someone who is involved in the ecosystem and maintains some open-source projects based on ElasticSearch, I am similarly curious about the move to not build upon existing projects (there could be a good reason, but haven't heard it yet). Why wasn't ElastAlert used / built upon for alerting? https://github.com/yelp/elastalert https://github.com/yelp/elastalert Or why wasn't ElasticSearch SQL used / built upon for SQL? https://github.com/NLPchina/elasticsearch-sql https://github.com/NLPchina/elasticsearch-sql Or why wasn't SearchGuard used / built upon for Security? https://github.com/floragunncom/search-guard https://github.com/floragunncom/search-guard All of them have Apache 2.0 license.
    • ssgao 8y ago
      For SearchGuard, only the basic auth is Apache 2.0. Anything practical you need to pay to use it.
      • sagichmal 8y ago
        Why isn't AWS paying to use it, then? It's not like they don't have the money?
• sagichmal 8y ago
  What a dick move.
• jerrac 8y ago
  I like seeing a, hopefully, solid OSS implementation of security for ES. I understand the companies need to make money and pay developers, but I've never been very comfortable with them keeping the security features out of the OSS version.
• otisg 8y ago
  WDYT: Would it have been better for AWS to initiate Open Distro for ES as part of e.g. Apache Software Foundation, whose mantra is "community over code"? (or if not ASF for some reason, then Eclipse or CNCF for example)
  • fredsted 8y ago
    Yes, and I think they should have done so, just look at the responses in this thread. It's just been launched and everybody is afraid of Amazon vendor lock-in. For many techies, just the Amazon name is scary even though this is Apache 2.0 licensed.
• jahewson 8y ago
  Who is acting in the best interest of the open source community, Elastic or AWS?
  • benatkin 8y ago
    Neither. Right now AWS seems to be acting in the best interest of the ElasticSearch community, but this doesn't extend to open source as a whole. For the long-term, the open source community should look to projects where the center of gravity is outside of an open core or FANG company. ElasticSearch went open core a while ago, and Elastic's form of open core is more like MongoDB or Redis than it is like nginx or Docker. As for Amazon, I think I'd rank them below facebook, and I would rank facebook below google and Microsoft, as stewards of open source projects.
    • benatkin 8y ago
      Hadn't seen this. Wow! https://www.nginx.com/blog/nginx-joins-f5/ https://www.nginx.com/blog/nginx-joins-f5/
  • forty 8y ago
    My guess is that Elastic is acting the best interest of Elastic and AWS in the best interest of AWS :) I used to like a lot Elastic, we have a rather big cluster work with the OSS version, and I really disliked how they started mixing the proprietary part with the oss one. I hope we will get a good answer from them. Like splitting again the proprietary plugins and/or open sourcing some of the security features :)
  • anth_anm 8y ago
    AWS, in the short term. In the long term their actions make it impossible to build any sort of business based directly on FOSS. You have to do support, or hosting, or something else. Guess what, AWS has a lot more money to do both of those things. and Amazon will keep right on going sucking up code and giving nothing back. We need aggressive licensing changes. Hell, API copyright might be necessary to stop this nonsense. We can still have good licensing in that scenario.
• mcescalante 8y ago
  I recently decided to experiment with ES and prefer to evaluate things with Apache 2.0 licensing if available, even if I may pay for to license it at a later time. Elasticsearch Still maintains -oss suffixed docker images and builds that are true Apache 2.0. You can read more about this here: https://www.elastic.co/products/x-pack/open https://www.elastic.co/products/x-pack/open I jotted down instructions to run the docker containers based on a few different solutions from different places: https://gist.github.com/mcescalante/6be03751c820677cf0f15c7b864fa23a https://gist.github.com/mcescalante/6be03751c820677cf0f15c7b... I'm sharing this because I got the vibe from the linked post in the comments and the overall marketing of "Open Distro for ES" that Elasticsearch was 'not open anymore' and had just discovered the Apache 2.0 builds within the last week.
• ignoramous 8y ago
  I see this as a net positive (https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ notwithstanding): Elastic.co, imo, has iron-grip (in terms of licensing and features that it builds) on XPack and Elasticsearch. This incredible technology that rode on OSS wave is increasingly controlled by a for-profit organization that also acts like one. This is very similar to how Google dealt with numerous forks of Android by essentially moving key pieces to GooglePlayServices and other closed-source apps in addition to responding with shutting out manufacturers and SoC providers that weren't OHA signatories [0][1]. Amazon felt the burnt of that [2]. Apart from including/forking other community plugin projects (elasticsearch-sql, SearchGuardSSL) in open-distro [3], AWS seems to be investing to make this more "cloud-native", as well: This observation comes from PerformanceAnalyzer (released) and IndexStateManagement (request-for-comment). - IndexStateManagement [4] is simply "never send a human to do a machine's job" automation of common yet frequent tasks required to keep elasticsearch humming along. If used in conjunction with AWS's/GCP's/Azure's managed-cloud offering, this feature might be an amazing sell for a lot of enterprises that want to set up things and have them running with as few dev-ops/engs as they can. - PerformanceAnalyzer [5] could track multiple signals from servers running open-distro and may perform reactionary actions to either shed load, throttle requests, shift workload and so on, something similar to what MeltWater did [6]. [0] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... [1] https://techcrunch.com/2009/12/22/google-open-when-convenient/ https://techcrunch.com/2009/12/22/google-open-when-convenien... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/16/amazon-set-to-launch-htc-built-smartphone https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/16/amazon-se... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19361234 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19361234 [4] https://github.com/opendistro-for-elasticsearch/index-management/blob/master/RFC.md https://github.com/opendistro-for-elasticsearch/index-manage... [5] https://opendistro.github.io/for-elasticsearch-docs/docs/pa/reference/ https://opendistro.github.io/for-elasticsearch-docs/docs/pa/... [6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18413862 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18413862
  • praseodym 8y ago
    The IndexStateManagement plugin is basically the same thing as Index Lifecycle Management (ILM) which was introduced in beta form in Elasticsearch 6.6. ILM is under the Elastic license though, so it’s not free-as-in-freedom, but the feature is included in the free-as-in-beer basic license. https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/6.6/index-lifecycle-management.html https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/6.6/...
• fredsted 8y ago
  I think a fork/distro of ES was bound to happen. As a heavy ES user, I've looked into getting a license to access the so-called X-Pack features, most of which are very basic and should belong in the OSS distribution anyways. Lots of those features are now available as plugins, but until now there's been no overall solution for getting the missing features. After an almost two hour long phone call, we kind of got the pricing in a roundabout way from the salesperson; tens of thousands of dollars per year for a small cluster. We REALLY wanted to get this, which is why we dealt with the sales process, but there was just no way to justify that to our management.
• ousta 8y ago
  Well what about enterprise support? When customers buy an enterprise solution at elastic they get support right? what would entitle them to move to this offering.
  • otisg 8y ago
    There are other companies that offer enterprise support for Elasticsearch (e.g. https://sematext.com/support/elasticsearch-production-support/ https://sematext.com/support/elasticsearch-production-suppor...) as well as training an such. No loss for ES users there.
    • ousta 8y ago
      well it is not same. vendor support and third party services (aka support). you can influence the product through support and through being a direct customer.
      • otisg 8y ago
        You would think so, but that is not how it works with Elastic and lots of it customers. I have heard that from N of their (ex-)customers. I get why this happens for them. There is a certain vision and goal, and anything that doesn't align is a nuisance. This is part business part philosophy, culture, and brand you want to build in and around your business.
• kureikain 8y ago
  Is this some kind of AWS is trying to cleanup their reputation in ES? Their offer of ES is super weird. THe data node is only support 2 AZs, instead of 3. They also require using the IAM for authentication(you sign the request with access+secret keys) in other words, hard to simply `curl` it. So if they added this, maybe they will eventually bring these into AWS ES offer, so that they can do the thing that X-Pack offer - because we cannot install plugins on AWS ES yet.
  • jen20 8y ago
    Of all the (many and varied) criticisms that can be levelled at the AWS Elastic Search service, integration with IAM is a strange one: it’s ‘harder to curl’, because it’s more secure.
• praseodym 8y ago
  Last year Elastic opened up the source code of their commercial X-Pack offering: https://www.elastic.co/blog/doubling-down-on-open https://www.elastic.co/blog/doubling-down-on-open. This means that these components (security, alerting, etc.) are now available in the GitHub repository, but they are covered by the proprietary Elastic license instead of the Apache 2.0 license like the rest of the software. Some of the proprietary parts can be used for free, some need a paid commercial subscription. None of them are true open source (free as in freedom), though. However, this is also when Elastic started muddying the waters (to quote the AWS blog post). Most of the new features across the Elastic stack that were added in the past couple of months (Index Lifecycle Management, APM UI, Infrastructure and Logs UI, Kibana multi-tenancy, Kibana Canvas) are not added to the Apache 2.0 codebase but are only available in the free-but-not-open version. These features can be used for free with the Basic subscription (no registration needed) but only under the terms of the Elastic license. And this Elastic license is where AWS feels the pain. It clearly prohibits SaaS offerings: > You agree not to: [..] use Elastic Software Object Code for providing time-sharing services, any software-as-a-service, service bureau services or as part of an application services provider or other service offering (collectively, "SaaS Offering") [..] (from https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/6.6/licenses/ELASTIC-LICENSE.txt https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/6.6/licenses/E...) The license is very similar to moves that MongoDB and Redis made recently. Only Elastic is just now doubling down on adding new (and highly demanded) features to their proprietary offering.
  • Jedd 8y ago
    For improved context, read the HN thread around that announcement: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16487440 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16487440
  • SeaCow 8y ago
    If you read the Elastic License, it's actually worse than Mongo & Redis -- you can't modify it and use it for anything other than testing. You can basically install & use it only (definition of License, then the restrictions sections); if your testing uncovers something wrong... what are you supposed to do, under the terms of their license?
• devhead 8y ago
  Hosted ES by AWS is a good solution to regret later in life. They have minimal tooling, poor change management, poor logging, inability to address broken state and no support what so ever for a service you paid for. I won't go back to their hosted ES. Edit: spelling
  • softwaredoug 8y ago
    I really recommend services like Bonsai and MeasuredSearch (I know there's others, but haven't used them). They have a lot of tooling and provide a lot of great support. In fact, the support and attention to your account is probably the biggest differentiator they have to AWS tooling.
• unethical_ban 8y ago
  I notice that ODFE (as I am trying to make the acronym a "thing") is packaged for Docker and RPM. It would be nice if they provided the plugins/extensions separately, or otherwise had build-from-source instructions.
• cik 8y ago
  I couldn't be happier about this. We build on Elastic today - and there are several features that we've written into our codebase from scratch, that are available in commercial Elastic only. Quite frankly if there's a community that once again "open", and that we can even contribute some of our technology to with everyone benefiting - I'll be pretty thrilled. In tomorrow's test I'm going to throw ~3 billion messages at Elastic 6.x and then immediately stand this up over the same database... Time to see what happens :)
  • cik 8y ago
    I'm going to respond to myself - but so far so good. I just ingested ~14B messages into a local instance, on top of an existing Elastic. Interestingly enough - and to Amazon's credit, the have SSL running by default, with a default admin password. Our (soon to be old) solution to this was to run nginx in front of Elastic - and do another bunch of things with stunnel for balancing. I'm happy to see default encryption. Pretty happy to start!
• all_usernames 8y ago
  Title isn't quite right: "As was the case with Java and OpenJDK, our intention is not to fork Elasticsearch, and we will be making contributions back to the Apache 2.0-licensed Elasticsearch upstream project as we develop add-on enhancements to the base open source software."
  • tyingq 8y ago
    Unless they assume every enhancement they put in their, uh, "not a fork" repo will make it upstream, unaltered, it's a fork. That seems inevitable to me. There's probably something eventually that either isn't wanted by Elastic, or wanted...but implemented in some different way.
• weberc2 8y ago
  > Unfortunately, we are seeing other examples where open source maintainers are muddying the waters between the open source community and the proprietary code they create to monetize the open source. As I understand it, Amazon took ElasticSearch and monetized it, therefore competing directly with Elastic (the company that develops ElasticSearch). Elastic felt Amazon was taking advantage of Elastic's commitment to open source, and started developing new features under a proprietary license, but releasing them for free. The idea was to prevent their work from benefiting a competitor. Basically in this blog post, Amazon is trying to make the case that they're a Good Tech Company and Elastic are the Bad Guys or something. Generally I'm all for nuance and "the truth is probably somewhere in the middle", but Elastic is the rare company that truly is committed to open source (at least at the current moment in history) and Amazon is, well, Amazon.
  • holoduke 8y ago
    So not in the middle then. Amazon the bad guy here.
  • patrickthebold 8y ago
    releasing "new features under a proprietary license" might be a smart business move, but let's not pretend that it's pro open source.
    • weberc2 8y ago
      Afaict, Elastic views Amazon's competition as an existential threat, and is releasing under a proprietary license as a last resort. Mind you, the source code is open and they're not charging for it. I'm not sure what you expect a company to do? Fall on their sword out of a dogmatic sense of Open Source Honor?
      • jrochkind1 8y ago
        I expect neither party to do anything different than they did.
• HillRat 8y ago
  Definitely creates a new risk model for hybrid OSS-Enterprise software: build something attractive enough for the big players to co-opt and they might just, ah, fork you up. Now Elastic either accepts pull requests that create clean OSS versions of their pay-locked functionality, or they accept the existence of a feature-plus “Amazon Elasticsearch” fork in the market. While I give Cockcroft all the credit in the world (remembering him from his Sun days), this is still a tough spot for Elastic to be in. (More discussion in the Twitters: https://mobile.twitter.com/_msw_/status/1105260461149151232 https://mobile.twitter.com/_msw_/status/1105260461149151232)
  • quickben 8y ago
    From that twitter feed "adrian cockcroft: What should we have done instead, that Elastic would have agreed to? We have customers to support" And this is where the spot he is in gets tighter. Because now the aws business model threats anybody using X as Amazon's user that should be monetized. So I don't see Amazon backing off profits, and I don't see the OSS community getting any less pissed off from not seeing a piece of the cake. This story (Mongo, elastic co, etc) seems far from being over.
    • jake_morrison 8y ago
      Amazon should pay money to the people who create the open source. Not necessarily because a license compels them to, but because it's the right thing to do. If they don't, then the ecosystem collapses. A good example is RedHat. There is basically no money in simply selling operating system licenses anymore, but someone has to keep developing it. Amazon makes lots of money off of EC2 instances. They could easily throw a few million a year into paying kernel developers. But will they? Are they just going to be a free rider, while keeping anyone else from being able to make any money too?
      • cthalupa 8y ago
        >Amazon should pay money to the people who create the open source. Not necessarily because a license compels them to, but because it's the right thing to do. If they don't, then the ecosystem collapses. Elasticsearch is built on top of Lucene. When Elastic received triple digit millions in VC funding, did they pay the Lucene developers? They're not even Apache Foundation sponsors, as best as I can tell. >Amazon makes lots of money off of EC2 instances. They could easily throw a few million a year into paying kernel developers. But will they? Amazon contributes back to the Linux kernel. How much contribution is needed to make it "right"? How do we determine it? Does Amazon need to employ them directly, or sponsor projects? What about their Platinum sponsorship of the Apache Foundation?
• viburnum 8y ago
  OK this sounds like bullshit. Can somebody explain what's going on?
  • benatkin 8y ago
    Amazon doesn't like the direction that Elastic is headed, so they've forked ElasticSearch. They don't want to maintain and document it all by themselves, and they do want for their users to be able to run it themselves (especially for running it locally or on CI), so they've open sourced it.
    • markbnj 8y ago
      Well to be fair they explicitly said it wasn't a fork, and that any work they do on it will be pushed upstream. The cynical view, I guess, is that the commits they push will be providing free features that compete with Elastic's paywalled features.
      • benatkin 8y ago
        I can't find anywhere where they said it isn't a fork. I searched the article for the word fork to make sure I didn't miss anything. They said it wasn't an internally forked version meaning it isn't a private fork, and they said that their intention wasn't to create a fork. I'm not completely sure if anything that's core to ElasticSearch is forked. The repos on GitHub are modules not including one that's called "elasticsearch" or "core" or "main" or something like that, but some seem pretty essential. As for myself, I like to call an alternative distro a fork, and I disagree that their intention isn't to create a fork, based on my idea of a fork. They're free to have their opinion on what constitutes a fork, but I don't think they're an authority on it so I'm gonna stick to my current view of what a fork is...
        • markbnj 8y ago
          The statement was made on the AWS blog, which was linked from an earlier post of this item I think. Anyway: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elastic... > This is not a fork; we will continue to send our contributions and patches upstream to advance these projects.
• jake_morrison 8y ago
  Basically Amazon screwing Elastic. Take their code and monetize it, not giving anything back. When Elastic changed their license to prevent it, Amazon forks it. It's the biggest risk to open source right now. They are following the strategy of "commoditize the complementary good". Since Amazon makes money selling machine cycles, they want the software to be free.
  • __david__ 8y ago
    No, no, no. Amazon is using the software in the way it was intended, legally and ethically. It's like companies published software under a license and never gave a thought to the consequences of the license they chose. If you license permissively, be prepared for your competitors to use it!
    • tootie 8y ago
      Yeah but this is like eating an entire plate of free samples then asking for a refill. It's technically allowed but you're ruining for everyone else.
      • ttul 8y ago
        Nuh-uh. Elastic made millions selling stuff on top of open source that was licensed permissively to create a market. They knew exactly what they were getting themselves into.
        • weberc2 8y ago
          > millions A company turned a modest profit? Say it isn't so! The guy who wrote ElasticSearch created a company to finance the development of the project. For most of their history, they released their source code under a permissive license in good faith. Amazon abused that good faith, so now Elastic continues to make the source code open and license it freely to customers and the open source community (just not competitors). I've got no beef with Amazon, but you're kidding yourself if you compare them with Elastic in terms of ambition, greed, commitment to open source, etc.
• jawns 8y ago
  > At AWS, we believe that maintainers of an open source project have a responsibility to ensure that the primary open source distribution remains open and free of proprietary code so that the community can build on the project freely, and the distribution does not advantage any one company over another. Sections like this make me wonder if customers should demand that these announcements be delivered on video, rather than in print, so we can see whether the spokesperson can say it with a straight face.
• hguhghuff 8y ago
  In the old days, big companies spent gazillions to buy companies when they wanted to add their software to their product lineup. Amazon just takes it regards of whether or not the original developer is happy or hostile. This is going to redefine open source.
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  • e1ven 8y ago
    I don't get it - How is this different than Oracle forking RHEL or any number of other times this has happened?
    • berbec 8y ago
      Yup. Lost of successful companies are "forks". Ubuntu & Debian. Pfsense & freebsd. Linux & SCO Group.
      • sjansen 8y ago
        > Linux & SCO Group There are still people who believe this? Or did you forget to add </sarcasm>?
        • berbec 8y ago
          I figured saying this on HN would have the </sarcasm> taken as given :)
  • whoisjuan 8y ago
    I don't understand this rationale. So it's Open Source for everyone, but not for Amazon because is Amazon, so fuck Amazon? You can't have it both ways. That defeats the whole purpose of FOSS.
    • anth_anm 8y ago
• patwolf 8y ago
  I was always surprised one of the cloud providers didn't release a cloud-native full-text search service. A lot of projects could benefit by a simple text search service. I always found Elasticsearch to be a little clunky and found myself wishing there was an alternative. While I don't like to be locked into a cloud vendor, having a simple text search service might be enough to sway me towards a particular vendor, even if it's proprietary. Amazon's Elasticsearch service does simplify installation and management, but honestly I wish it were even simpler. I don't want to even think about CPU/memory sizing or the number of shards.
  • thekyle 8y ago
    Well Amazon offers CloudSearch which is a proprietary full-text search engine native to the AWS cloud. https://aws.amazon.com/cloudsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/cloudsearch/ EDIT: Just to expand on this, I also found that Google Cloud and Azure both have similar proprietary services. https://cloud.google.com/products/search/ https://cloud.google.com/products/search/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/search/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/search/
  • ILikeConemowk 8y ago
    Algolia comes to mind, no? I'm sure there should be many, many more.
• jmartrican 8y ago
  As I long time user of ES I applaud Amazon's effort here. ES is not new and it is missing basic functionality.
• all_blue_chucks 8y ago
  ITT: people shocked by the fact that open source licensing really is open source.
  • whoisjuan 8y ago
    - It's Open Source for everyone* - *except for Amazon.
• jchw 8y ago
  My personal, probably disagreeable opinion, but... The narrative that Amazon is somehow screwing over open source is getting old. I don't really think anything is 'screwing over open source', but if it's anything, it is the notion that we should severely restrict the licenses to ensure only the right people can monetize it. To me, the original spirit of open source is "I don't care what happens to this after I release it," like Linus releasing Linux so long ago. To that end, Amazon has certainly leveraged hundreds or thousands of FOSS projects over the years, but only a few have cried foul about it, and they happen to be startups releasing open source software. I'm totally supportive of developers and their rights to release software under whatever license they feel appropriate, but if you release open source software, benefit from your software being open source, for probably years, and then someone else monetizes it... I'd argue you really ought to have seen that coming from the get-go. The license explicitly allowed it, it's not a loop hole that nobody knew about, it's absolutely intentional. If people want to move over to shared source licenses like SSPL, or heck, even just close the source... that's fine too. But please don't try to call it open source or defending open source. It's defending a profit model that stopped working. Totally reasonable thing to do, but it's nothing to do with open source being corrupted.
  • anth_anm 8y ago
    FOSS devs have the same bills as anyone else.
    • jchw 8y ago
      Nobody is obligated to work on FOSS unless somebody is outright paying them to.
      • jgeada 8y ago
        But people that work on FOSS, as owners of the IP they create, are also allowed to put whatever restrictions they want on it; if you don't like those restrictions, don't use it. Pretty simple.
        • 8y ago
• spectre256 8y ago
  I run a company that offers consulting and hosted services around a 100% open core (https://geocode.earth https://geocode.earth, shameless plug). As someone who has a very strong desire to continue to be able to make a living while making open source software, I've been thinking long and hard about all the possible paths to take while maintaining open-source software as a job that pays the bills enough to run at least a small business. Some paths and possible outcomes are: - Open-core: Make most code pure open source, and then save some good stuff for pure proprietary. The lines are not _too_ blurred here, but this can get annoying. (Elastic's X-Pack was _super_ annoying to deal with back in the 2.x days). Risks: you have to balance crippling the core versus building compelling proprietary features. You have to add additional complexity into both codebases to deal with a clean delineation. Amazon (or other bigco) can re-implement open-source replacements for your proprietary parts. - Source-available: This in my mind includes any of the recent Redis Labs style licenses. Pros: more convenient from a setup perspective. Cons: Incredible legal risk for your users (compliance is harder). Uncertainty as all these licensees are new and possibly one-offs. Currently, there is a lack of goodwill around these licenses. Amazon can re-implement your entire interface (like with Mongo). - All open source: Simple, clean, but Amazon can just take all your code and replace you, right? It's possible to assume that all scenarios end poorly, but I really don't think so. Take any famous chef. They probably have published a cookbook with recipes for many, if not all of their most popular dishes. People still eat at their restaurants for at least the following reasons: - They want to experience the dish from the actual chef's establishment. Whether it's to be sure they're getting the real deal or simply for the image aspects of the experience, it's still worth it. - They know that the chef is always experimenting and pushing new things that aren't _yet_ in a cookbook, and they want to try it. Bringing this back to software, I am confident Elastic still has a reputation of being able to build a better Elasticsearch hosted service than AWS (in my experience, Elastic's is far superior). I also am confident that Elastic will continue to innovate using their proven experience building search products in the future, and that's a good reason to use their products or software over AWS. I believe that if you want to make money in open source you should do it by having valuable experience with some particular open source software that others are willing to pay for, not by building legal barriers to others doing the same thing. That's what I plan to do for my business and I believe Elastic can and will do it too. My hope is that in a few years after all these "clever" attempts to build moats around open source have proven futile, people will go back to good old-fashioned experience leading the way. But maybe I shouldn't hold my breath.
• anth_anm 8y ago
  Hot take, the future of open source is just massive companies sponsoring projects to get free dev hours. You can try to fight it, but if Amazon wants your project they will either take the code or build a compatible API. There is no defense, IP rights only favour proprietary software.
• bratao 8y ago
  If someone is looking for a third opensource alternative to Elastic Search, I highly recommend http://vespa.ai http://vespa.ai We migrated from ES, and it is truly next-gen compared to ES
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  • otisg 8y ago
    I'd love to hear more. Could you describe your experience and elaborate on how and why it's next-gen compared to ES?
• itaifrenkel 8y ago
  Amazon is forcing elastic to make money from their hosted offering, instead of their proprietary x-pack modules. Professional Services don’t scale as software do (compare AWS with Rackspace) - so I’m ignoring that income stream for now. Basically, they are trying to force Elastic into the AWS red ocean. Elastic, in response, would have to make a technology leap in order to best solve their customers problems. Examples include: Integrated data prediction, anomaly detections, clustering (online machine learning). Seamless multi region cluster deployment (with some consistency guarantee)...
• ousta 8y ago
  It is hosted on AWS as a service hence not open source.
• dman 8y ago
  The cloud that creates an Itunes like solution for OSS, creating a business model for OSS and earning the respect of developers will make bank like Apple did. Am hoping for one of the cloud players to adopt this strategy. Disclaimer: Views expressed above are my own and do not reflect any opinions from my employer.
  • vajrabum 8y ago
    You mean like yum install or apt get? If so, then yes but your prediction is a little late
    • dman 8y ago
      I mean something where the Apache authors get paid based on Apache usage by cloud customers (as an example).
• speedplane 8y ago
  Pure software open source projects should not accept VC money and expect to stay purely open source for long.
• james_s_tayler 8y ago
  The whole Amazon takes an open source product and monetizes it almost reminds me in a way of someone getting rich off an asset flip on the unity store. Just a big, giant, corporate version.
• ggm 8y ago
  I currently run stuff in elastic. I am now thinking that postgres:JSON may be better for me.
• hardwaresofton 8y ago
  If you're looking for options in the search space: - https://github.com/toshi-search/Toshi https://github.com/toshi-search/Toshi - https://github.com/tantivy-search/tantivy https://github.com/tantivy-search/tantivy (more like lucene) - https://github.com/blevesearch/bleve https://github.com/blevesearch/bleve
• jillesvangurp 8y ago
  I'm a long time Elasticsearch user (from before 1.0). I've also used Solr and I've built some lucene based search solutions before that as early as 2003. I'm also a customer of their hosted elastic cloud and I know several people inside that company; both former colleagues and through meetups. They do awesome stuff technically and it's a great product to use. In short, I think Amazon doing this is a good thing. I've had the pleasure of using their hosted solution and I can't recommend it with a straight face. Key management features in the API are blocked and upgrades are a pain in the ass (as in, not supported). Support and documentation is minimal. It's not terrible but you get a much better bang for buck by using Elastic cloud. Self hosting is not something I recommend you do until you need to. It's a PITA and requires a non trivial amount of devops by someone who knows what they are doing to do it right. Rarely worth the price and hassle unless you need to run this at petabyte scale on custom hardware. First, lets look at what this is not. This is not a fork of Elasticsearch or Kibana. If you go to the github account associated with this website, you'll see that this is simply Amazon publishing the source of plugins they use in their hosted solutions. The readme of those plugins basically instructs you to download the appropriate version of Elasticsearch from Elastic. Second, I was there when Shay Banon announced the licensing changes at Elastic ON in early 2018. At the time I already thought this was a somewhat unfortunate move as it muddles the water in terms what is and isn't open source. Technically what they announced was shared source for things that were previously closed source. Which is better than nothing but not ideal. The whole thing was designed to get more people to try this out than was the case when you needed to get a license before you could play with it. It's basically a form of shareware. We use Elastic Cloud, it seems all the cool stuff they talk about is mostly off limits to their basic tier users astill nd requires quite a bit of skill to get started with. I appreciate that they are trying to upsell this stuff but I seem to be doing fine with just the standard OSS features (and I know they are OSS because this is what I used before elastic cloud as well). I could switch back to self hosted and not lose much (other than convenience). Third, I think the Elasticsearch ecosystem benefits from having outside contributors; especially from big corporate entities like Amazon. Their history is literally bootstrapping off Apache Lucene as a small group of developers and consultants. They employ core committers and one of the co-founders is a core committer as well (I worked with him before Elastic happened). They've been working together with the Solr people on improving Lucene for the past six years and have made some awesome improvements. Lucene sees regular contributions from academics as well. It's a healthy project and it is core to what Elasticsearch does. IMHO this is something they need to nurture and keep and something that is core to their culture. The plugin ecosystem around Elasticsearch is where the action is commercially. They've built a lot of cool stuff around Elasticsearch that adds a lot of value. That too sees a lot of outside innovation. So, Amazon publishing some plugins is great. Also, given that they use it at scale, they probably have a thing or two to say about how to improve Elasticsearch and probably should be regularly creating pull requests, creating issues, etc. That's a good thing. Anything blocking that would be a bad thing In short, Elasticsearch created a big mess by mixing open and closed source and people are working around them. Instead of fighting that, they should double down of being open source at their core and benefit from this rather than attempting to fight it. I'd recommend them to 1) re-create and market their community edition, 2) actively considering offering support for Amazon customers and other people using their technology but outside of their bubble (e.g. Graylog). Work with the community instead of against it. Everybody wins.
• cnj 8y ago
  It looks like Amazon and Elastic have maneuvered themselves into a lose-lose situation. Amazon has to invest into an Open-Source fork, probably won't benefit from some of the feature development Elastic will be doing, and won't get any help running their ES-as-a-Service. Elastic won't see any revenue of the AWS ES-as-a-Service, and has lost a lot of goodwill with (potential) customers. I think they could have reached a compromise where AWS makes sure a share of their revenue from their ES-as-a-Service ends up at Elastic, and Elastic recommends and supports ES-as-a-Service for their customers who are on AWS. But these are apparently not the times for compromise, so we end up in a situation that is worse for AWS, Elastic and everyone in the wider community.
• deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
• javadevmtl 8y ago
  P.s: I think people are confused. This isn't a fork? Basically AWS should have came out and said. "Hey folks we created brand spanking new OSS plugins with sepcific funxtionality for Elastic" and you can use them!
• dang 8y ago
  We merged the related threads. Here are the relevant blog posts: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/keeping-open-source-open-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/keeping-open-source-... https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elasticsearch/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-open-distro-for-elastic...
• bd103dall 8y ago
  Found this perspective interesting: https://thenewstack.io/what-the-fork-amazon/ https://thenewstack.io/what-the-fork-amazon/
• bd103dall 8y ago
  Found this perspective interesting around COSS vs FOSS: https://thenewstack.io/what-the-fork-amazon/ https://thenewstack.io/what-the-fork-amazon/