Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

elastic.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 188 posts

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#121

Post by 0x202020 »

rmccue wrote: post #75

Hopefully this will let each of them compete on their own merits. I’ve been tossing up moving our workloads to Elastic Cloud anyway, because AWS ES Service is a source of constant headaches for us. Feels like at least once a week a server ends up in a state where we can’t fix it, and AWS engineers have to manually fix their internal state. Their standard response is “add more nodes”; well, we did that, and it is cost…

Like the others have said, definitely seems to be hit or miss. I inherited an old cluster running on elastic cloud, migrated it to AWS managed and it reduced monthly costs by nearly an order of magnitude on top of going from a 5-15 minute outage per day for master node election to having 3 over 2 years.

We’ve rewritten most of the interactions with the older version of ES into a new service and use a self-managed OpenSearch cluster on Graviton instances and it’s the most stable Elasticsearch/Solr solution I’ve ever interacted with

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#122

Post by dafelst »

nextaccountic wrote: post #77
LoveGracePeace wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me when people lump Oracle (or AWS for that matter) in with the likes of Microsoft.

The process to make MS-OOXML an ISO standard was a dirty one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization_of_Office_Open... and 2008 wasn't that long ago

Ballmer era Microsoft is a very different beast to Nadella era Microsoft

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#123

Post by pmontra »

zeckalpha wrote: post #93
sokoloff wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the presence of AGPL address most (almost all?) of your concern? It seems like that would offer individual users freedom to use and modify the source while precluding Amazon from monetizing it effectively. Those same properties of AGPL mean it’s generally viewed as not as effective at attracting a community of early users, but in a case where the alternative is proprietary-only and the company “wants” to be open…

AGPL only requires modified software used over a network to be contributed back. If it isn’t modified, no need!

If it isn't modified the AGPL is basically the same as "we use XYZ and you can download its source code from xyz.com" plus the copyleft.

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#124

Post by dragonwriter »

skrtskrt wrote: post #113
dragonwriter wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If everyone stomps their feet and says "there's no solution, otherwise it's not OSS!" then the end result is only going to be a lot less open-source software There's going to be less people trading on the idea of open source software while relying on the exclusivity of control of proprietary software—which in fact does not solve the problems which lead users to prefer open source software —to enable monetization, s…

I mean it seems to me like of these two situations: 1) there's a lot of software that's mostly-open-source-except-Amazon-isnt-allowed-to-run-a-hosted-version-of-it-without-paying-the-authors 2) all the software from 1) is completely proprietary a lot more people benefit from 1 than 2. But somehow it seems that OSS purists prefer #2? It seems like they would rather less Open-Source Software in the world, all to mainta…

> there's a lot of software that's mostly-open-source-except-Amazon-isnt-allowed-to-run-a-hosted-version-of-it-without-paying-the-authors

That's...not mostly open source. Being able to pay whomever to run a hosted version for you and not have that be exclusive to the original creators isn't, especially in the age when hosted services are in high demand, a peripheral feature of open source. It's integral to the value proposition.

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#125

Post by theamk »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #53
sokoloff wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s “detrimental” to companies who perhaps shouldn’t have chosen a license that allows AWS to do exactly what they did. Those companies can’t simultaneously claim to be competent and to have made that choice without knowing what they were doing. IMO, they chased the benefits of being open source and then changed course when the costs to them exceeded the benefits (which is fine for code going forward), but trademark…

> It’s “detrimental” to companies who perhaps shouldn’t have chosen a license that allows AWS to do exactly what they did. Yes, it is. Why the scare quotes? Lots of things are legally allowed that would be very detrimental to me. Or you. > Those companies can’t simultaneously claim to be competent and to have made that choice without knowing what they were doing. I'm glad you can tell the future. > IMO, they chased t…

You say "system has big problems"... so if you had magic power to pass any law and have everyone follow it, what would that law be?

I am guessing you didn't like how Amazon was profiting from ElasticSearch's work.. so would you retrospectively change ElasticSearch's license to SSPL? Or maybe help all companies: prohibit all permissive licenses (Apache, MIT, BSD etc..) entirely and force people to either AGPL, SSPL or fully commercial? Or make a law that no free software license may apply to companies with >$1 billion in revenue?

While we are at it, how about prohibiting commercial flat-rate unlimited site licenses? The huge companies can take advantage of those too.

The thing is, I bet Elastic's original decision to use Apache was to get more users, at the expense of also getting more competition. Now they have their users but they don't like the price they paid for it. This may have been a bad business decision on their part.. but I don't see "big problems" there, companies make bad business decisions all the time.

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#126

Post by skrtskrt »

dragonwriter wrote: post #124
skrtskrt wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it seems to me like of these two situations: 1) there's a lot of software that's mostly-open-source-except-Amazon-isnt-allowed-to-run-a-hosted-version-of-it-without-paying-the-authors 2) all the software from 1) is completely proprietary a lot more people benefit from 1 than 2. But somehow it seems that OSS purists prefer #2? It seems like they would rather less Open-Source Software in the world, all to mainta…

> there's a lot of software that's mostly-open-source-except-Amazon-isnt-allowed-to-run-a-hosted-version-of-it-without-paying-the-authors That's...not mostly open source. Being able to pay whomever to run a hosted version for you and not have that be exclusive to the original creators isn't, especially in the age when hosted services are in high demand, a peripheral feature of open source. It's integral to the value…

I said nothing about having hosting "be exclusive to the original creators"

If AWS/Google/Azure had to pay some fee to the original creators to provide a hosted version, they would definitely do it for a popular enough product.

Everyone would still get all the benefits, except AWS/Google/Azure get a little less money (down from some hundreds of millions) and the creators get a little more than $0.

I fail to see the negative effects on any entity there except what would amount to rounding error in AWS costs. Doesn't actually seem so integral to the value proposition of open source. Definitely seems "mostly open source".

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#127

Post by Dylan16807 »

sokoloff wrote: post #82
Dylan16807 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get it, you see this as complaining about how things shifted when this is a tradeoff they embraced from the start. But there are situations where it's not that things changed, with companies that would love to be open source but it would hurt them at all phases. If you have to be super proprietary to make any money off software, that's bad for everyone. When a piece of code is responsible for enormous amounts of mo…

Does the presence of AGPL address most (almost all?) of your concern? It seems like that would offer individual users freedom to use and modify the source while precluding Amazon from monetizing it effectively. Those same properties of AGPL mean it’s generally viewed as not as effective at attracting a community of early users, but in a case where the alternative is proprietary-only and the company “wants” to be open…

I think what would solve my main concern here is a small royalty, but I also think it would be very difficult to implement in a fair way.

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#129

Post by taf2 »

rmccue wrote: post #75

Hopefully this will let each of them compete on their own merits. I’ve been tossing up moving our workloads to Elastic Cloud anyway, because AWS ES Service is a source of constant headaches for us. Feels like at least once a week a server ends up in a state where we can’t fix it, and AWS engineers have to manually fix their internal state. Their standard response is “add more nodes”; well, we did that, and it is cost…

We run our own ES cluster it’s not very hard… ec2 instances. The hardest part is just reading the docs carefully before upgrading… we also don’t modify schema eer mappings very often…. Oh and we run 3 masters, and 3 clients and then the rest are data nodes… since doing that knock on wood super stable

Re: Elastic and Amazon reach agreement on trademark infringement lawsuit

#130

Post by taf2 »

clambordan wrote: post #84
rmccue wrote: post #75

Hopefully this will let each of them compete on their own merits. I’ve been tossing up moving our workloads to Elastic Cloud anyway, because AWS ES Service is a source of constant headaches for us. Feels like at least once a week a server ends up in a state where we can’t fix it, and AWS engineers have to manually fix their internal state. Their standard response is “add more nodes”; well, we did that, and it is cost…

We had similarly terrible experiences with AWS ES, so we moved to self-hosted Elastic. It's better but still pricey and requires more manhours dedicated to tuning. Their move away from open-source has been unfortunate. For that and some other reasons we've ended up more impressed with Logz.io and Splunk SaaS.

What kind of tuning do you do? We spend time but typically on upgrades… very rarely have we spent much time on tuning I’m curious what kind of tuning are people doing beyond mlock and having enough memory / nodes?
Post reply on HN