4 ms·
I'm really struggling to understand the marketing from Honeycomb. They have a lot of reputable and smart staff, seemingly making conflicting public statements.
by jldugger 5y ago
I'm really struggling to understand the marketing from Honeycomb. They have a lot of reputable and smart staff, seemingly making conflicting public statements.
For example, in this post, the author describes how expensive cardinality is for TSDB, but doesn't really address how Honeycomb's column store implementation efficiently stores data with full cardinality anywhere near as cheaply.
Like, I fully appreciate how having traces and structured event logs will improve observability, but this 'actually, Prometheus is expensive too' angle is weird, and their pricing page's 'starts at $100' doesn't really make it easy to compare.
- jldugger 5y agoThinking about this a bit more, there's really two factors you have to balance when setting these systems up: event volume and cardinality. It feels like Honeycomb basically has you pre-pay for cardinality. Every field you add is equally efficient at storing data regardless of type or possible values (well, probably table compression helps some), and the event size is not a factor in billing(?). Since there's no pre-calculated aggregation, you bear the full cost of every event.