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

201–210 of 473 posts

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#201

Post by lmeyerov »

PeterCorless wrote: post #125
lolinder wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see a couple people on here claiming this, but no data to back it up. Elastic beats out OpenSearch by a wide margin on every metric I've thought to check (gh stars, gh stars rate of increase, number of commits, number of pull requests opened, number of pull requests merged, number of issues, stack overflow questions...). Not a single one shows OpenSearch ahead. What metric are you using to come to the conclusion th…

As a related proxy for market awareness, DB-Engines.com's ranking is a composite index of a number of factors: • Google search volume and quantity of search result pages (blogs, recipes, etc.) • Mentions in LinkedIn profiles as a skill • Number of job post listings as a requisite skill • Social media mentions It is a measure of "mindshare" or "share of voice." Not one of market share ($$$) or utilization (TBs under m…

Relevant, the curves tell a different story: https://db-engines.com/en/ranking_trend/system/Elasticsearch...

A big question is New + Churning installs. I'd expect a scary portion of the New, and inherently slower rate of Churn are heading to OS instead ES. The curves support that: note that ES isn't substantively growing on that chart. Anecdotally, we see most new installs as leaning to OS in the security industry, which is one of the top money makers for ES/OS.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#203

Post by [deleted] »

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 ?

[deleted]

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#204

Post by csdreamer7 »

bdcravens wrote: post #189
phoronixrly wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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%.

> 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%.

This is very misleading. There is a lot more code than just the kernel for the Linux operating system. If you ran the numbers for a default install of Ubuntu or RHEL that would be far more useful. The Linux kernel requires far deeper skills than a lot of user-and development so it is going to have fewer contributors per year on average.

Source: I am a Linux kernel engineer.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#205

Post by changexd »

29athrowaway wrote: post #42
aabhay wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[Count me out] No reason to use Elasticsearch in 2024.

[i] am still not going to use Elasticsearch [For Free?] again?

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#206

Post by mardifoufs »

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.

Isn't elastic itself based on open source tech too? Is elastic exploiting java for example?

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#207

Post by tyre »

remram wrote: post #200
tyre wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the network call, it’s what you do with it. Let’s take redis, pretending it’s AGPL. Adding a new command to the source code: definitely a modification. Adding a new feature to the redis client: also a modification. Creating a class (RedisPlusClient) that inherits from its client and adds a feature: Maybe a modification? Feels modification-adjacent. Building a microservice that uses the redis client and expos…

I don't disagree with those new examples, though you've moved the goalpost quite a bit.

I didn’t mean to. I very much don’t know what would or wouldn’t be considered a violation. I think there’s a not-insane-or-bad-faith argument that each of these violate what AGPL is trying to do: force modifications to software into the public domain.

To the people who do love copyleft, I could imagine them not agreeing with a network being a clear line of modification, especially with how common distributed systems are.

For me and how I read it, I agree with you that it’s not. I also understand lawyers who don’t want to be the test case.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#208

Post by CuriousCosmic »

ok_dad wrote: post #156
samspenc wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the GP, and I don't have a dog in this fight, but I think what they are complaining about is this sequence of events: - ElasticSearch was open-source - Amazon offered ElasticSearch open-source as a paid service - ElasticSearch was not happy about this and changed their license - Amazon forked ElasticSearch (the open-source version) and created OpenSearch based on that, continuing to serve OpenSearch - (Few ye…

What, when Amazon forked an open source project, as was allowed by the license, and continued to support that open source license even when the original company abandoned theirs? I’m not an Amazon fan, but they did the same thing (forking) that many others do, and they did it perfectly legally according to the license.

It's a bit more complicated than that because Elastic during all of this had some of the plugins in Amazon's OpenDistro (now OpenSearch) project recycling proprietary code from Elastic's commercial, source available codebase under OpenDistro's permissive Apache-2.0 license.

https://www.elastic.co/blog/dear-search-guard-users-includin...

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#209

Post by adonese »

simonw wrote: post #2

> The good news is that while it was painful, it worked. 3 years later, Amazon is fully invested in their fork, the market confusion has been (mostly) resolved, and our partnership with AWS is stronger than ever. We were even named AWS partner of the year. I don't entirely understand this bit.

I think they were trying to say something along the lines of we wanted amazon to take full responsibility over a fork and to dedicate actual resources for it, such that it will be distinguishable from our product.

Re: Elasticsearch is open source, again

#210

Post by CuriousCosmic »

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 ?

well importantly, Elastic was originally Apache-2.0. Then Amazon started using their stuff and they relicensed to their not-really-FOSS-license. Then Amazon forked their stuff, a bunch of legal conflicts happened. Now they are friends again. And now they relicensed to AGPL (which is FOSS).

So they were originally Apache-2.0 which was permissive versus now they are AGPL which is copyleft.

The important distinction here is that if Amazon was to use Elastic directly, they'd have to make their contributions available to users and those users could then upstream those contributions back to Elastic. In the old situation with Apache-2.0, Amazon could take contributions from Elastic but then they kept them themself for the most part without up-streaming.

This forces a give-and-take relationship vs a one-way relationship.

Also importantly now that Elastic is AGPL they can integrate anything they want from OpenSearch's Apache-2.0 licensed projects but unless OpenSearch becomes AGPL as well, they can't pull any contributions from Elastic.

Post reply on HN