Interesting to see a new approach! You wrote that you don't like Loki's LogQL, but it looks quite similar (Victoria's LogQL first): log.level:error _stream:{app!~"buggy_app|foobar"} {app!~"buggy_app|foobar"} | "log.level:error" The pipes are arguably a bit noisy in Loki queries (compared to spaces in Victoria's), but I find they do make the queries a bit more readable, and it's easier to understand under the hood how…
- Loki doesn't allow queries without stream filters. This may be very inconvenient. For example, try selecting all the logs with the 'error' word in Loki. In LogsQL you just type 'error' and that's it! - As I know, Loki doesn't allow selecting all the logs on the given time range. For example, try selecting all the logs for the last 5 minutes in Loki query language. In LogsQL this is just '_time:5m'. - Loki has unrea…
> Loki doesn't allow calculating multiple stats in a single query
Victoria's support for projecting multiple stats in one query is nice, with Loki's LogQL you need to write two separate queries.
> Loki doesn't allow queries without stream filters
True! I don't mind filtering for e.g. `{env: "production"}` but each to their own :-)
---
RE Loki vs Victoria, which I don't really want to get into since I am not a vendor and have not tried Victoria...
> Loki doesn't allow selecting all the logs on the given time range
True! TBH I don't mind selecting a date from a date picker. One issue is that I guess it's going to be a bit slower to write precise date/time ranges if they're baked into the query language?
> Loki doesn't provide functionality for sorting of the returned logs > Loki can return only up to 5000 logs from a single query by default
I think these are Grafana UI restrictions -- as I wrote above there are indeed limitations with the Grafana UI, but I don't think they're necessarily syntax related.