> Not as much true as it could be, with the offerings I'm aware of (AWS OpenSearch, Elasti, Co's own cloud), and having used OpenSearch more extensively, you're

> Not as much true as it could be, with the offerings I'm aware of (AWS OpenSearch, Elasti, Co's own cloud), and having used OpenSearch more extensively, you're still basically fully responsible for managing the cluster topology and the "data" node type is what handles storage and the important compute for search. If you need more storage you'll have to bump the EBS volume sizes on a new cluster and then do replication, or add a new node to the existing cluster and rebalance your data which are both very expensive operations. If you need more compute you're stuck with adding more storage regardless, but you can at least limit how much. This, absolutely. I'll add that I once tried to look at the Elasti.co offer for an ELK solution that could handle the logs we are currently managing internally (on EC2 managed by us with some automation), and you basically had to specify all the details of the topology to get a quote. It was basically a layer on top of AWS Cost Calculator with their margin baked in. No way you can tell them "I send on average X bytes/day, I want a quick answer for Y days and a slower answer for Z days and a global retention of XY days" and get a "you will pay aprox NNN dollars/month in the HA config, MMM in the non-HA config"