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

Elasticsearch is open source, again

elastic.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 473 posts

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#181

Post by pooper »

quyse wrote: post #51
JoshuaRogers wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt like that was implied by the usage of AGPL: if Amazon wanted to start using this and apply patches on top of it, the AGPL would require that they share those patches with their customers, which would allow Elastic to integrate them into main again.

I don't think that's their intention. Elastic wouldn't be able to integrate Amazon's patches back into their codebase without losing the ability to change the license in the future. Even more, since it's AGPL, they'd have to get rid of their other licenses immediately.

> Elastic wouldn't be able to integrate Amazon's patches back into their codebase without losing the ability to change the license in the future.

(I anal, even if I were a lawyer, I am definitely not YOUR lawyer, yada yada)

If I were Elastic, I would require Amazon dot com or anyone else who wants to contribute code to Elastic to sign a CLA. Depending on how the CLA is structured, this could allow Elastic to continue multi licensing?

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#182

Post by lolinder »

hluska wrote: post #175
lolinder wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a reason why you prefer it but not evidence that the brand has overtaken Elastic's.

This evidence can only come from financial accounting. Amazon does not report OpenSearch results separately so you’re looking for data that does not exist in a public form. It’s a waste of time.

> This evidence can only come from financial accounting.

That's not true—we're talking about brand value, not financial value of the product. If AWS switched over to offering ElasticSearch again (not that they will) and ditched OpenSearch, I have no reason to believe that their financial numbers would go down a bit.

Brand value is nearly impossible to measure, but to the extent that you can it'd be by measuring perception among those outside the company, not through an accounting of the company's actual revenue.

Think of it this way: the brand LENRUE [0] is worth approximately zero. The company that makes these products could rebrand tomorrow and their revenue stream wouldn't take a hit in the slightest. But the company presumably actually makes some amount of money.

For Elastic vs OpenSearch, the brand value of the two products should be loosely comparable by looking at some measures of public perceptions, and I can't find any measurement that would suggest OpenSearch is in the lead.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/stores/LENRUE/page/24E9713E-AC7E-4269...

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#183

Post by liveoneggs »

sergiotapia wrote: post #45
everfrustrated wrote: post #16

Too late, the community all moved over to OpenSearch. I'll never forgive Elastic for locking basic security features behind their paid licence. Over the years probably millions of people had their data compromised due to that (due to people inadvertently leaving instances on the public internet - having auth enabled by default would have helped a lot)

I think it's pretty sad that Conglomo X can take an open source product, add some tweaks and sell/capture the entire market. Basically taking all the work that open source maintainers have done. What's the solution here?

Like elastic did to Apache Lucene, the core of their product?

Or when they infected their previously open source components like logstash?

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#184

Post by jairuhme »

js4ever wrote: post #71
lolinder wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is "the community" here? Every metric I'm able to find (commit frequency, gh stars, gh stars gained since the launch of opensearch, stack overflow tags, google search result counts...) suggests that OpenSearch didn't really take much of Elastic's mind share in the end. Each metric I've looked at shows OpenSearch at somewhere between 20%-50% of Elastic's numbers, which isn't nothing but is a far cry from "the com…

Last time I deployed elastic was years ago. In the meantime I deployed hundreds of opensearch instead for customers.

Counterpoint: I just got introduced to the ElasticSearch/OpenSearch products and have gone with Elastic

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#185

Post by godber »

Raed667 wrote: post #5
foxyv wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was so that AWS would create their own name for their fork: > we changed the license, knowing it would result in a fork of Elasticsearch with a different name and a different trajectory. It’s a long story. I think the name of the fork is now OpenSearch.

what is preventing AWS from dropping OpenSearch and going back to just selling Elastic ?

OpenSearch really appears to have a significant amount of development momentum. It is functionally equivalent with Elasticsearch. There would be no incentive for AWS to do this. After ES broke their compatibility with OpenSearch they also broke compatibility with their own older versions. This forced users to choose in order to move forward with anything. I don’t know how it worked out for others but I’ve converted hundreds of ES clusters to OS and switched all development to OpenSearch because they started gaining momentum and didn’t make decisions that were actively hostile to their users.

Edit: As long as OpenSearch doesn’t start breaking the self hosted use case, I don’t see any reason to consider Elasticsearch again. In fact, ES would have to offer up a significant advantage to overcome the bother.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#186

Post by clwg »

ezekg wrote: post #37
foxyv wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was so that AWS would create their own name for their fork: > we changed the license, knowing it would result in a fork of Elasticsearch with a different name and a different trajectory. It’s a long story. I think the name of the fork is now OpenSearch.

Am I the only one not buying this reasoning? Seems like there's more than is being said, otherwise they would have said this by now. I'd reckon that ELv2 had friction that couldn't be easily overcome without OSS or at the very least DOSP [0]. I personally experienced said friction with ELv2, so makes me curious. [0]: https://opensource.org/dosp

Here is the reasoning they gave at the time.

"So why the change? AWS and Amazon Elasticsearch Service. They have been doing things that we think are just NOT OK since 2015 and it has only gotten worse. If we don’t stand up to them now, as a successful company and leader in the market, who will?"

https://www.elastic.co/blog/why-license-change-aws

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#187

Post by dangus »

Salgat wrote: post #106
ezekg wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only one not buying this reasoning? Seems like there's more than is being said, otherwise they would have said this by now. I'd reckon that ELv2 had friction that couldn't be easily overcome without OSS or at the very least DOSP [0]. I personally experienced said friction with ELv2, so makes me curious. [0]: https://opensource.org/dosp

Sounds to me like they're trying to cover up a bad case of regret. At our company we've fully shifted to OpenSearch, so there's no going back to ElasticSearch even if we wanted (not that we would want to). Also there is a lot of engineering contribution from Amazon that's seemingly gone now from Elasticsearch, right?

This is exactly it. They made the gigantic miscalculation that Amazon wouldn't win this battle.

I can't believe they didn't predict that this exact outcome would happen: Amazon forks under a more permissive license and becomes the new standard instead of Elastic because the entire package (managed service from AWS + more permissive license) is a lower risk package to the average business.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#188

Post by grogenaut »

lolinder wrote: post #96
jdc0589 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats a super one sided set of metrics. it doesn't tell us anything about how many people are actually using one, just how much visible dev activity they have. I don't have those metrics or an opinion, im just saying that value is based on utilization by a product's target users, not support activities.

> it doesn't tell us anything about how many people are actually using one, just how much visible dev activity they have Stars and rate of star growth and stack overflow activity are all passable proxies. They're not great, and I'm open to better metrics, but they're what I can find. Truly, if anyone can give me any metric that shows OpenSearch ahead I'll shut up. I can't find one, and I've looked.

AWS revenue. Internal AWS stats. Open search client pulls (not sure if the client is different now). Opensearch is mainly going to be used on AWS so that won't show up as much in GitHub stars.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#189

Post by bdcravens »

phoronixrly wrote: post #112
Salgat wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds to me like they're trying to cover up a bad case of regret. At our company we've fully shifted to OpenSearch, so there's no going back to ElasticSearch even if we wanted (not that we would want to). Also there is a lot of engineering contribution from Amazon that's seemingly gone now from Elasticsearch, right?

Sounds like you've fully shifted to exploiting (without contributing anything) to OpenSearch. I think Elastic will be just fine without your company or Amazon.

According to a quick search, there are 33M "users" of Linux (I suspect that number is way too low). Only 15k have contributed to the kernel. That's an "exploitation" rate of well over 99.9%.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#190

Post by busterarm »

aabhay wrote: post #24
richbell wrote: post #12

> [D.N.A.] > [LOVE.] I don't understand what these are supposed to mean. Is this a new writing style, song references, or just a quirk of the author?

These are songs by Kendrick Lamar. I guess that these were used to try and add a youthful, lighthearted touch to the article? Didn't work on me though.

I really hate this corporate trend. The soundtracks to all of our company meetings are basically mostly songs about wanting to fuck that girl you met in the club last night and I seem to be the only person who finds it incredibly inappropriate for the setting.
Post reply on HN