Elasticsearch is an enterprise search tool from Elastic in Mountain View, California.
$16
per month
MySQL
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
MySQL is a popular open-source relational and embedded database, now owned by Oracle.
N/A
Pricing
Elasticsearch
MySQL
Editions & Modules
Standard
$16.00
per month
Gold
$19.00
per month
Platinum
$22.00
per month
Enterprise
Contact Sales
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Elasticsearch
MySQL
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Elasticsearch
MySQL
Considered Both Products
Elasticsearch
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch has a steep learning curve, but it is the best in terms of customization and use cases it can cover most of the business needs. The other tools might be easier to integrate with and start seeing results, but you will end up having issues when you need customized …
Elasticsearch is relatedly cheaper the splunk. Opensearch is good and we migrated some data into it but the critical data stays in elasticsearch as it has formal support.
They all have their specific pros and cons. Elastic was actually initially brought in to provide less expensive functionality to Splunk, and Splunk use cases. Grafana was brought in to provide less expensive visualizations compared to Splunk and Elastic...I would recommend …
Elasticsearch is the most well-known and supported free data platform that we identified. We are taking advantage of community knowledge and practices. In terms of flexibility and breadth of use cases no other competitor came close to Elasticsearch. We've tried Solr in the past …
Elasticsearch brings the capacity to grow data ingest and provides 24/7 visibility into critical services across IT and Business teams. With Elasticsarch, specialized support teams can easily view all the relevant information by using real-time dashboards, and can immediately …
Elasticsearch and Solr are both based on Lucene, but the user community for Elasticsearch is much stronger, and setting up a cluster is easier. Splunk is very well suited for Log indexing and searching but is not nearly as flexible as Elasticsearch. Couchbase is a great NoSQL …
Search and analytics capabilities of Elasticsearch are superior to its competitors. Being open source, it is a cheaper and faster solution than other competitors. Installation is straightforward and it can be potentially deployed anywhere and everywhere! There is no need for …
Faster, better, more efficient. There was no comparison in Elasticsearch vs LEM. AlienVault was decent but too expensive for what it does compared to Elastic. The only competitor I'd consider as in the same ballpark in the SIEM world is Splunk. Save yourself the money and get a …
I think Elasticseach works less great compared to Splunk. Mainly the way the Splunk search head works is vastly superior to the way the Elasticsearch query language works. Furthermore, the Splunk architecture is in my opinion easier to roll out and scale-up. Splunk also has a …
Elasticsearch is very well packed in a broad set of features, ranging from customization capabilities to security and add-ons, and also comes with a great visualization tool named Kibana. Most of the competitors are strong in some of these areas, but I know of no other that's …
Almost no one uses Solr anymore--most have migrated to Elasticsearch. I've never tried it myself but I heard Solr is much more difficult to configure and because it doesn't use a REST API, it locks you into Java and XML. XML--ick! Lucene: Elasticsearch is built using Lucene …
From my perspective, there is nothing currently on the marker better than Datadog, but unfortunately, that's a pricey product, Elasticsearch deliver us part of Datadog functionalities being cheaper. Fluentd as a service (provided by the company behind Fluentd) looks like a …
Previously, we used Microsoft SQL Server's full-text search. Elasticsearch is faster and that includes searching and indexing and re-indexing the catalog of products.
With Elasticsearch you can integrate a lot of data sources. It can act as a small DataLake where you can put different kinds of data and extract important insights. With Splunk, additional to elevated costs of licensing and hardware, you need to have expert engineers to address …
All database systems have things they are good at, and things they aren't as good at. Riak/SOLR is great as a K/V store, but SOLR cannot handle requests as fast as ElasticSearch. In fact, SOLR is the reason we had to migrate to ElasticSearch. Redis is great at SET operations …
ES does not compete with the above packages but compliments them. By automating and mining logs, you are able to get a sense of the business process, marketing data or whatever else you need to capture and mine. The potential energy stored within Elasticsearch makes it a great …
Elasticsearch is the most powerful and easy to use platform in this market. It's open source which makes enhancements very possible and also makes customization something that is commonplace. We're able to create custom modules to pull data from both log and config files, which …
As far as we are concerned, Elasticsearch is the gold standard and we have barely evaluated any alternatives. You could consider it an alternative to a relational or NoSQL database, so in cases where those suffice, you don't need Elasticsearch. But if you want powerful …
When we first evaluated Elasticsearch, we compared it with alternatives like traditional RDBMS products (Postgres, MySQL) as well as other noSQL solutions like Cassandra & MongoDB. For our use case, Elasticsearch delivered on two fronts. First, we got a world-class search …
Is not a drop-in replacement for any of the things listed above. MySQL has it's purpose and use-cases, same as those. It's a low-cost solution for high read/low write applications and works very well when used in the right circumstances. Support can be purchased from various …
MySQL was the first option due to the existing knowledge, and after using other databases, it also appeared to be the most predictable in terms of costs
Each of the products has its own merits and demerits. however since MySQL is a very good documentation and global community its easy to learn and apply in different stages for analytics work. compare to other data bases its simple for setup and work on it. MySQL is cost …
Rest all the big brand databases incure high licensing cost giving almost the same value that MySQL is giving being an open source database. Other databases like Oracle, MS SQL servers need extensive resource along with a huge team to manage those databases. However, thats not …
Selection of MySQL or Oracle SQL developer depends on various factors like timelines, requirements, features and data volumes. We are using both MySQL and Oracle SQL developer in our organization. MySQL is more suited for small applications with few thousand TPS and less users. …
In terms of capabilities, Microsoft SQL Server is one of the leaders in the database market. It provides a lot of features for high availability, disaster recovery, performance and security. The primary reason why MySQL 8 was chosen was due to the open source nature of the …
We chose MySQL because of its open-source nature and its compatibility with various systems, languages, and databases. It is easy to use and fast. Additionally, it has been in the market for more than 30 years now which makes it a reliable option when compared to its …
Our original implementation of MySQL was to replace an Access database that had unfortunately been able to grow beyond its abilities and scope. MySQL seemed to offer all the benefits of Access (easy to set up, use and administer) with none of the downsides (reliability, …
As I have been commenting in our company, we have solved our performance problems and responses obtaining speed in the queries occupies less disk space, in addition to its price and all the tools of great Scope it possesses.
The primary reason we use MySQL instead of MongoDB is because we are in a large, legacy enterprise environment. MySQL works well and has all the necessary integrations with the various other software tools in our company's suite. Additionally, MySQL is a relational database …
It was quite challenging to choose between these as they both have their pros and cons. But as far as we were concerned the decision to adopt the MYSQL database for our production was because it is an open-source language. This makes it very compatible with our needs and was …
MongoDB has a dynamic schema for how data is stored in 'documents' whereas MySQL is more structured with tables, columns, and rows. MongoDB was built for high availability whereas MySQL can be a challenge when it comes to replication of the data and making everything redundant …
MySQL works properly, it gives us the most efficient data and the organization of the data yields an unsurpassed result in performance. And in the same way, in our case as a company, we have users from different offices that are in the same line of work since they can share and …
Microsoft SQL and SQLite i have used for different scenarios. SQLite is very small database which is more easy to work with low profile devices like mobiles. MySQL is not suitable for that level and MSSQL mainly comparable with MYSQL. MSSQL has complex installations and …
So the main reason i would stack up Mysql from rest of the others is that it is open source which can be helpful for doing any POC on the products and learning new technologies and it is also compatible with all other softwares like Microsoft SQL serve and Postgre Sql
Having used both PostgreSQL and Microsoft SQL Server, I can tell that MySQL performs admirably in a Linux setting. When compared to Microsoft SQL Server, the extra benefit is the minimal or nonexistent licence fee. We find that MySQL's programming interface is particularly …
Elasticsearch is really well suited for searching text (Natural Language Processing) and you can fine tune the searches and scoring very well. I like the ability to find Significant Terms in the Index, where you can find aggregations that are really relevant to a specific search. It also allows for queries to lead to new queries via aggregations which is great for navigating your data. It is less suited to doing more complex aggregations where slices of data are required to be processing using guassian normalizations. And doing searches which join different documents is very very hard, and requires serious thought on how to denormalize data.
From my own perspective and the tasks that I perform on a daily basis, MySQL is perfect. It has a reasonable footprint, is fast enough and offers the security and flexibility I need. Everyone has their preferred applications and, no doubt, for larger data warehouses or more intensive applications, MySQL may have its limits, but for the area that I operate in, it's a great match.
Security: is embedded at each level in MySQL. Authentication mechanisms are in place for configuring user access and even service account access to applications. MySQL is secure enough under the hood to store your sensitive information. Also, additional plugins are available that sit on top of MySQL for even tighter security.
Widely adopted: MySQL is used across the industry and is trusted the most. Therefore, if you face any problems, simply Google it and you shall land in plenty of forums. This is a great relief as when you are in a need of help, you can find it right in your browser.
Lightweight application: MySQL is not a heavy application. However, the data you store in the database can get heavy with time, but as in the configuration and MySql application files, those are not very heavy and can easily be installed on legacy systems as well.
Setting Java memory thresholds can be a pain for those not accustomed to things like Eden Space & Old Generation which can lead to over allocation, or more likely, under allocation. Apache Solr had a similar issue. It would be nice if the program would take an extra step and dogfood it's own advice by analyzing the system & processes to return a solid recommendation for that configuration. The proper configuration information is outlined in the documentation, it would be nice if that was automated.
The only health check that ElasticSearch reports back is a "red" status without any real solid information about what is going on, though its usually memory thresholds or disk I/O. I am currently on ElasticSearch 1.5 so that may have changed for newer versions. When the status goes "red", I as the administrator of the software, feel like I lose control of whats going on which should rarely happen. Something more verbose would eliminate that.
This is more of a critique of the ElasticStack in general. The whole top to bottom stack is starting to get feature creep with things that are better suited in other software and increasing the barrier for entry for people to get started with setting up a robust logging infrastructure. ElasticSearch as a storage search engine, is pretty streamlined, but I can see that the tools that comprise the ELK Stack are going to require a certification with constant study at some point. During major release for Logstash a while back, it literally took a month to learn a new language because Elastic completely changed the syntax. For a medium sized organization of only a couple of admins, that is a pretty high bar where time is money. They really should work on refining/automating the tools & search engine they have, instead of shoehorning/changing things on to an already rock solid foundation.
Although you can add the data you require as more and more data is added, the fixity of it becomes more critical.
As the demand, size, and use of the system increase, you may also need to change or acquire more equipment on your servers, although this is an internal inconvenience for the company.
For teaching Databases and SQL, I would definitely continue to use MySQL. It provides a good, solid foundation to learn about databases. Also to learn about the SQL language and how it works with the creation, insertion, deletion, updating, and manipulation of data, tables, and databases. This SQL language is a foundation and can be used to learn many other database related concepts.
To get started with Elasticsearch, you don't have to get very involved in configuring what really is an incredibly complex system under the hood. You simply install the package, run the service, and you're immediately able to begin using it. You don't need to learn any sort of query language to add data to Elasticsearch or perform some basic searching. If you're used to any sort of RESTful API, getting started with Elasticsearch is a breeze. If you've never interacted with a RESTful API directly, the journey may be a little more bumpy. Overall, though, it's incredibly simple to use for what it's doing under the covers.
I give MySQL a 9/10 overall because I really like it but I feel like there are a lot of tech people who would hate it if I gave it a 10/10. I've never had any problems with it or reached any of its limitations but I know a few people who have so I can't give it a 10/10 based on those complaints.
We've only used it as an opensource tooling. We did not purchase any additional support to roll out the elasticsearch software. When rolling out the application on our platform we've used the documentation which was available online. During our test phases we did not experience any bugs or issues so we did not rely on support at all.
The support staff is friendly, knowledgeable, and efficient. I only had to get part way through my explanations before they had a solution. They will walk you through a fix or actually connect in and fix the problem for you--or would if you can allow it. I've done it both ways with them. They are always forthcoming with 'how to do this if it happens again' information. I love working with MySQL support.
Elasticsearch is the most well-known and supported free data platform that we identified. We are taking advantage of community knowledge and practices. In terms of flexibility and breadth of use cases no other competitor came close to Elasticsearch. We've tried Solr in the past be we encountered issues which were deal-breaking for us. MongoDB - it just did not pass our evaluation parameters as a main data platform. We still use it for smaller purposes, though.
Each of the products has its own merits and demerits. however since MySQL is a very good documentation and global community its easy to learn and apply in different stages for analytics work. compare to other data bases its simple for setup and work on it. MySQL is cost effective and low risk choice for start up organization makes it more suitable for small to medium enterprises.
I am not in finance and I suspect even if I was this would be hard to measure. But for sure, Elasticsearch has enabled us to have the most flexible data model in the industry for our customer's data, and in doing so we have attracted many many technical customers and got much of their $$$.
One problem with Elasticsearch is that because it runs on the JVM, there can be some stop-the-world JVM garbage collections happening that can take down nodes and reduce indexing speed. The solution for that tends to be "let's just upgrade the CPU on that machine". And before you know it you are paying $$$ because this'll happen with 40+ machines.
On the other hand, I do think that ES is more efficient than other systems and so it requires fewer nodes to keep it highly tolerant and available, so we probably saved some money that way.