We performed a comparison between Elastic Search and Palantir Foundry based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has great scalability."
"The AI-based attribute tagging is a valuable feature."
"The UI is very nice, and performance wise it's quite good too."
"It is easy to scale with the cluster node model."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Enterprise Search is the Discovery option for the visualization of logs on a GPU instead of on the server."
"The initial installation and setup were straightforward."
"We had many reasons to implement Elasticsearch for search term solutions. Elasticsearch products provide enterprise landscape support for different areas of the company."
"X-Pack provides good features, like authorization and alerts."
"It's scalable."
"The virtualization tool is useful."
"The solution offers very good end-to-end capabilities."
"Live video sessions enhance the available documentation and allow you to ask questions directly."
"The ease of use is my favorite feature. We're able to build different models and projects or combine different projects to build one use case."
"The security is also excellent. It's highly granular, so the admins have a high degree of control, and there are many levels of security. That worked well. You won't have an EDC unless you put everything onto the platform because it is its own isolated thing."
"It is easy to map out a workflow and run trigger-based scripts without having to deploy to another server."
"The data lineage is great."
"Ratio aggregation is not supported in this solution."
"They could improve some of the platform's infrastructure management capabilities."
"There are potential improvements based on our client feedback, like unifying the licensing cost structure."
"There are challenges with performance management and scalability."
"The documentation regarding customization could be better."
"Better dashboards or a better configuration system would be very good."
"Dashboards could be more flexible, and it would be nice to provide more drill-down capabilities."
"Elastic Search could benefit from a more user-friendly onboarding process for beginners."
"Difficult to receive data from external sources."
"Some error messages can be very cryptic."
"It requires a lot of manual work and is very time-consuming to get to a functional point."
"The workflow could be improved."
"The solution could use more online documentation for new users."
"There is not a wide user base for the solution's online documentation so it is sometimes difficult to find answers."
"Compared to other hyperscalers, Palantir Foundry is complex and not so user-intuitive."
"The data lineage was challenging. It's hard to track data from the sources as it moves through stages. Informatica EDC can easily capture and report it because it talks to the metadata. This is generated across those various staging points."
Elastic Search is ranked 9th in Cloud Data Integration with 59 reviews while Palantir Foundry is ranked 12th in Cloud Data Integration with 13 reviews. Elastic Search is rated 8.2, while Palantir Foundry is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Elastic Search writes "Played a crucial role in enhancing our cybersecurity efforts ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palantir Foundry writes "The data visualization is fantastic and the security is excellent". Elastic Search is most compared with Faiss, Milvus, Azure Search, Pinecone and Amazon Kendra, whereas Palantir Foundry is most compared with Azure Data Factory, Palantir Gotham, SAP Data Services, AWS Glue and Alteryx Designer. See our Elastic Search vs. Palantir Foundry report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration 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.
