Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Elastic Search vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.0
Organizations report increased efficiency and ROI from Elastic Search, with proper implementation and data integration being crucial.
Sentiment score
7.8
Red Hat OpenShift improved productivity, scalability, and ROI with seamless cloud integration, benefiting sectors needing high security like banking.
We have not purchased any licensed products, and our use of Elastic Search is purely open-source, contributing positively to our ROI.
Moving to OpenShift resulted in increased system stability and reduced downtime, which contributed to operational efficiency.
With OpenShift combined with IBM Cloud App integration, I can spin an integration server in a second as compared to traditional methods, which could take days or weeks.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
Elastic Search's customer service is supported by a strong community and resources, though response times can be slow.
Sentiment score
6.8
Customer service varies, with quick attention to urgent issues but mixed feedback on response times for complex problems.
Red Hat's technical support is responsive and effective.
I have been pretty happy in the past with getting support from Red Hat.
We have dealt with many cases with Red Hat support, and while they eventually solve issues, it sometimes takes them a long time to reach a resolution, particularly with complex matters related to IBM Cloud.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Elastic Search offers strong scalability and ease of use but may face challenges with large databases and complex indexes.
Sentiment score
7.6
Red Hat OpenShift excels in scalability, efficiently managing large deployments with features like Horizontal Pod Autoscaling for extensive workloads.
I can actually add more storage and memory because I host it in the cloud.
The on-demand provisioning of pods and auto-scaling, whether horizontal or vertical, is the best part.
Red Hat OpenShift scales excellently, with a rating of ten out of ten.
OpenShift's horizontal pod scaling is more effective and efficient than that used in Kubernetes, making it a superior choice for scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Elastic Search is stable and reliable for enterprise use, with occasional issues in large-scale data or new releases.
Sentiment score
7.6
Red Hat OpenShift is stable and reliable, with improved performance in recent versions, rated highly by users for stability.
It provides better performance yet requires more resources compared to vanilla Kubernetes.
I've had my cluster running for over four years.
It performs well under load, providing the desired output.
 

Room For Improvement

Elastic Search users seek improved security, scalability, integration, and support, alongside better UI, onboarding, and licensing enhancements.
Red Hat OpenShift users seek improved documentation, configuration simplicity, enhanced security, and better integration, deployment, and interface accessibility.
This can create problems for new developers because they have to quickly switch to another version.
Learning OpenShift requires complex infrastructure, needing vCenter integration, more advanced answers, active directory, and more expensive hardware.
We should aim to include VMware-like capabilities to be competitive, especially considering cost factors.
The removal of Grafana and HPA from monitoring caused some issues.
 

Setup Cost

Elastic Search is cost-effective initially but can become expensive with additional nodes and premium features despite flexible licensing.
Red Hat OpenShift pricing is cost-effective with flexible licensing, extensive features, and strong support, though improvements are needed.
Red Hat can improve on the pricing part by making it more flexible and possibly on the lower side.
The cost of OpenShift is very high, particularly with the OpenShift Plus package, which includes many products and services.
The cost is a crucial factor, particularly with licensing.
 

Valuable Features

ELK offers fast search, scalable architecture, advanced analytics, and integration with Logstash, X-Pack, for flexible, cost-effective enterprise data management.
Red Hat OpenShift excels in security, scalability, Kubernetes integration, CI/CD support, and multi-cloud flexibility for efficient application management.
Elastic Search makes handling large data volumes efficient and supports complex search operations.
Aggregation is faster than querying directly from a database, like Postgres or Vertica.
OpenShift offers an easy-to-use graphical user interface for cluster management, making it more accessible for administrators.
A valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift is its ability to handle increased loads by automatically adding nodes.
The concept of containers and scaling on demand is a feature I appreciate the most about Red Hat OpenShift.
 

Categories and Ranking

Elastic Search
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Indexing and Search (1st), Cloud Data Integration (11th), Search as a Service (1st), Vector Databases (1st)
Red Hat OpenShift
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (3rd), Server Virtualization Software (9th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Elastic Search and Red Hat OpenShift aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Elastic Search is designed for Indexing and Search and holds a mindshare of 27.8%, up 25.7% compared to last year.
Red Hat OpenShift, on the other hand, focuses on PaaS Clouds, holds 11.8% mindshare, up 10.8% since last year.
Indexing and Search
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Anand_Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Captures data from all other sources and becomes a MOM aka monitoring of monitors
Scalability and ROI are the areas they have to improve. Their license terms are based on the number of cores. If you increase the number of cores, it becomes very difficult to manage at a large scale. For example, if I have a $3 million project, I won't sell it because if we're dealing with a 10 TB or 50 TB system, there are a lot of systems and applications to monitor, and I have to make an MOM (Mean of Max) for everything. This is because of the cost impact. Also, when you have horizontal scaling, it's like a multi-story building with only one elevator. You have to run around, and it's not efficient. Even the smallest task becomes difficult. That's the problem with horizontal scaling. They need to improve this because if they increase the cores and adjust the licensing accordingly, it would make more sense.
Mikhael Ibrahim - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamlessly monitor microservices with streamlined DevOps capabilities
Most benefit from it, however, I work with Kubernetes, and installing Vanilla Kubernetes is easy. That said, it introduces many tools that need to be set up individually. OpenShift comes ready out of the box, with all tools installed and configured. Red Hat certifies and confirms that all the components are compatible with each other. OpenShift's superior dashboard is a notable strength, especially when compared to Kubernetes. The integrated DevOps capabilities, such as pipelines and the container registry, are extremely beneficial. Additionally, its capability to monitor microservices and containers with integrated tools like Prometheus is a major advantage. The horizontal pod scaling exceeds the scalability features I found in Kubernetes.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Indexing and Search solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ELK Elasticsearch?
Logsign provides us with the capability to execute multiple queries according to our requirements. The indexing is very high, making it effective for storing and retrieving logs. The real-time anal...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ELK Elasticsearch?
I don't know about pricing. That is dealt with by the sales team and our account team. I was not involved with that.
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
I found an issue with Elasticsearch in terms of aggregation. They are good, yet the rules written for this are not really good. There is a maximum of 10,000 entries, so the limitation means that if...
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
 

Also Known As

Elastic Enterprise Search, Swiftype, Elastic Cloud
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Adobe, Booking.com, BMW, Telegraph Media Group, Cisco, Karbon, Deezer, NORBr, Labelbox, Fingerprint, Relativity, NHS Hospital, Met Office, Proximus, Go1, Mentat, Bluestone Analytics, Humanz, Hutch, Auchan, Sitecore, Linklaters, Socren, Infotrack, Pfizer, Engadget, Airbus, Grab, Vimeo, Ticketmaster, Asana, Twilio, Blizzard, Comcast, RWE and many others.
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic, Luigi's Box, IBM and others in Indexing and Search. Updated: February 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.