3 ms·

Just curious, as I'm in the market - why should I use this instead of the ELK stack?

• SkipperCat 2y ago
  We've found that ClickHouse is extremely fast for write-once/read-many. So its great for recording logs. If Telescope provides the search/index features that Elastic provides, this could be a nice performance bump. FWIW, I haven't tested Telescope, so this is all just my musing.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• kbumsik 2y ago
  It is not same as OP, but according to a similar o11y stack on top of Clickhouse, Signoz, Clickhouse based logging costs less than ELK for storage and performs better: https://github.com/SigNoz/logs-benchmark https://github.com/SigNoz/logs-benchmark
• r0b3r4 2y ago
  Well, if you're happy with ELK, you should definitely use it! As I mentioned earlier, I’m not trying to sell anything or convince people to switch from their current solutions - just offering an alternative perspective on how things can be done. From my perspective, a ClickHouse-based setup can be cheaper and possibly faster in certain conditions – here’s some comparison made by ClickHouse Inc. - https://clickhouse.com/blog/clickhouse_vs_elasticsearch_the_billion_row_matchup https://clickhouse.com/blog/clickhouse_vs_elasticsearch_the_... My motto is "Know your data". I’m not a big fan of schemaless setups - I believe in designing a proper database schema rather than just pushing data into a black hole and hoping the system will handle it.