We performed a comparison between Elastic Search and OpenShift based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic, IBM, OpenText and others in Indexing and Search."There's lots of processing power. You can actually just add machines to get more performance if you need to. It's pretty flexible and very easy to add another log. It's not like 'oh, no, it's going to be so much extra data'. That's not a problem for the machine. It can handle it."
"It provides deep visibility into your cloud and distributed applications, from microservices to serverless architectures. It quickly identifies and resolves the root causes of issues, like gaining visibility into all the cloud-based and on-prem applications."
"Elasticsearch includes a graphical user interface (GUI) called Kibana. The GUI features are extremely beneficial to us."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its utility and usefulness."
"The special text processing features in this solution are very important for me."
"Gives us a more user-friendly, centralized solution (for those who just needed a quick glance, without being masters of sed and awk) as well as the ability to implement various mechanisms for machine-learning from our logs, and sending alerts for anomalies."
"We can easily collect all the data and view historical trends using the product. We can view the applications and identify the issues effectively."
"I appreciate that Elastic Enterprise Search is easy to use and that we have people on our team who are able to manage it effectively."
"Security is also an important part of this solution. By default, things are running with limited privileges and securely confined to their own resources. This way, different users and projects can all use the same infrastructure."
"We want to build a solution that can be deployable to any cloud because of client requirements and OpenShift allows us to do this."
"This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems."
"Overall, the solution's security throughout the stack and software supply chain is excellent."
"The company had a product called device financing, where the company worked as a partner with Google. It allowed customers to take mobile phones on loan or via credit. When we migrated those services to OpenShift in February last year, we were able to sell over 100,000 devices in a single day, which was very good."
"What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud. I also find the design of OpenShift good."
"The security is good."
"The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
"There are a lot of manual steps on the operating system. It could be simplified in the user interface."
"They're making changes in their architecture too frequently."
"Kibana should be more friendly, especially when building dashboards."
"While integrating with tools like agents for ingesting data from sources like firewalls is valuable, I believe prioritizing improvements to the core product would be more beneficial."
"There are some features lacking in ELK Elasticsearch."
"We'd like more user-friendly integrations."
"It should be easier to use. It has been getting better because many functions are pre-defined, but it still needs improvement."
"They could improve some of the platform's infrastructure management capabilities."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs. Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime. Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud. I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster."
"OpenShift could improve by providing the ability to integrate with public cloud platforms. This way we can easily use the services that these platforms offer. For instance, Amazon AWS. However, all the three major hyper-scalers solutions offer excellent DevOps and CI/CD tooling. If there was an easy way to integrate with them it would be beneficial. We need a way to easily integrate with the monitoring and dashboard services that they provide."
"This solution could be improved by offering best practices on standardization and additional guidance on how to use this solution."
"Latency and performance are two areas of concern in OpenShift where improvements are required."
"Room for improvement is around the offerings that come as a bundle with the container platform. The packaging of the platform should be done such that customers do not have to purchase additional licenses."
"One area for improvement is the documentation. They need to make it a little bit more user-friendly. Also, if you compare certain features and the installation process with Rancher, Rancher is simpler."
"We experienced issues around desktop security, that stopped us implementing a new feature that had been developed."
Elastic Search is ranked 1st in Indexing and Search with 59 reviews while OpenShift is ranked 4th in PaaS Clouds with 53 reviews. Elastic Search is rated 8.2, while OpenShift is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Elastic Search writes "Played a crucial role in enhancing our cybersecurity efforts ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenShift writes "Provides us with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints". Elastic Search is most compared with Faiss, Milvus, Pinecone, Azure Search and Amazon Kendra, whereas OpenShift is most compared with Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS).
We monitor all Indexing and Search reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
