Apache Spark vs Logstash

• Rich APIs for data transformation making for very each to transform and prepare data in a distributed environment without worrying about memory issues
• Faster in execution times compare to Hadoop and PIG Latin
• Easy SQL interface to the same data set for people who are comfortable to explore data in a declarative manner
• Interoperability between SQL and Scala / Python style of munging data

Read full review

• Logstash design is definitely perfect for the use case of ELK. Logstash has "drivers" using which it can inject from virtually any source. This takes the headache from source to implement those "drivers" to store data to ES.
• Logstash is fast, very fast. As per my observance, you don't need more than 1 or 2 servers for even big size projects.
• Data in different shape, size, and formats? No worries, Logstash can handle it. It lets you write simple rules to programmatically take decisions real-time on data.
• You can change your data on the fly! This is the CORE power of Logstash. The concept is similar to Kafka streams, the difference being the source and destination are application and ES respectively.

Read full review

• Memory management. Very weak on that.
• PySpark not as robust as scala with spark.
• spark master HA is needed. Not as HA as it should be.
• Locality should not be a necessity, but does help improvement. But would prefer no locality

Read full review

• Since it's a Java product, JVM tuning must be done for handling high-load.
• The persistent queue feature is nice, but I feel like most companies would want to use Kafka as a general storage location for persistent messages for all consumers to use. Using some pipeline of "Kafka input -> filter plugins -> Kafka output" seems like a good solution for data enrichment without needing to maintain a custom Kafka consumer to accomplish a similar feature.
• I would like to see more documentation around creating a distributed Logstash cluster because I imagine for high ingestion use cases, that would be necessary.

Read full review

• It has had a very positive impact, as it helps reduce the data processing time and thus helps us achieve our goals much faster.
• Being easy to use, it allows us to adapt to the tool much faster than with others, which in turn allows us to access various data sources such as Hadoop, Apache Mesos, Kubernetes, independently or in the cloud. This makes it very useful.
• It was very easy for me to use Apache Spark and learn it since I come from a background of Java and SQL, and it shares those basic principles and uses a very similar logic.

Read full review

• Positive: Learning curve was relatively easy for our team. We were up and running within a sprint.
• Positive: Managing Logstash has generally been easy. We configure it, and usually, don't have to worry about misbehavior.
• Negative: Updating/Rehydrating Logstash servers have been little challenging. We sometimes even loose data while Logstash is down. It requires more in-depth research and experiments to figure the fine-grained details.
• Negative: This is now one more application/skill/server to manage. Like any other servers, it requires proper grooming or else you will get in trouble. This is also a single point of failure which can have the ability to make other servers useless if it is not running.

Read full review