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

Elastic Search vs Weka 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Elastic Search
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Indexing and Search (1st), Cloud Data Integration (5th), Search as a Service (1st), Vector Databases (2nd)
Weka
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Data Mining (4th), Anomaly Detection Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Elastic Search and Weka aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Elastic Search is designed for Indexing and Search and holds a mindshare of 12.2%, down 27.5% compared to last year.
Weka, on the other hand, focuses on Data Mining, holds 9.3% mindshare, down 21.2% since last year.
Indexing and Search Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Elastic Search12.2%
Lucidworks6.7%
OpenText Knowledge Discovery (IDOL)6.3%
Other74.8%
Indexing and Search
Data Mining Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Weka9.3%
IBM SPSS Modeler19.1%
IBM SPSS Statistics18.5%
Other53.099999999999994%
Data Mining
 

Featured Reviews

Anurag Pal - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Search and aggregations have transformed how I manage and visualize complex real estate data
Elastic Search consumes lots of memory. You have to provide the heap size a lot if you want the best out of it. The major problem is when a company wants to use Elastic Search but it is at a startup stage. At a startup stage, there is a lot of funds to consider. However, their use case is that they have to use a pretty significant amount of data. For that, it is very expensive. For example, if you take OLTP-based databases in the current scenario, such as ClickHouse or Iceberg, you can do it on 4GB RAM also. Elastic Search is for analytical records. You have to do the analytics on it. According to me, as far as I have seen, people will start moving from Elastic Search sooner or later. Why? Because it is expensive. Another thing is that there is an open source available for that, such as ClickHouse. Around 2014 and 2012, there was only one competitor at that time, which was Solr. But now, not only is Solr there, but you can take ClickHouse and you have Iceberg also. How are we going to compete with them? There is also a fork of Elastic Search that is OpenSearch. As far as I have seen in lots of articles I am reading, users are using it as the ELK stack for logs and analyzing logs. That is not the exact use case. It can do more than that if used correctly. But as it involves lots of cost, people are shifting from Elastic Search to other sources. When I am talking about pricing, it is not only the server pricing. It is the amount of memory it is using. The pricing is basically the heap Java, which is taking memory. That is the major problem happening here. If we have to run an MVP, a client comes to me and says, "Anurag, we need to do a proof of concept. Can we do it if I can pay a 4GB or 16GB expense?" How can I suggest to them that a minimum of 16GB is needed for Elastic Search so that your proof of concept will be proved? In that case, what I have to suggest from the beginning is to go with Cassandra or at the initial stage, go with PostgreSQL. The problem is the memory it is taking. That is the only thing.
XS
Manager at XS AMSAFIS DATASETS, S.L.
A good solution offering a range of tools but is limited by its user-handling capacities
In a new machine learning job, if the method is a bit foreign to me, if I have to do it in R, it could be a tedious task. First, I need to identify the libraries required for the new methodology. This can involve identifying two, three, or even four libraries. Then, I need to read their manuals thoroughly. This is time-consuming. In Weka, as all machine learning tools are on my desktop, I easily find out the method. As a freelancer, people send me datasets, and I work on the statistics at home before providing the solution. When a solution needs to be implemented on a server, server programmers install it on the server. This is similar to Power BI, where I prepare files on my desktop, and someone else uploads them to the server for others to access. I think I cannot send a Weka solution to a server programmer. In Weka, anyone can run the program without being a programmer, which is a good feature since the entry cost is very low.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Elastic Search is very quick when handling a large volume of data."
"Implementing the main requirements regarding my support portal​."
"Decision-making has become much faster due to real-time data and quick responses."
"The products comes with REST APIs."
"The initial setup is fairly simple."
"The solution offers good stability."
"Elastic Enterprise Search is scalable. On a scale of one to 10, with one being not scalable and 10 being very scalable, I give Elastic Enterprise Search a 10."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its utility and usefulness."
"Weka is a very nice tool, it needs very small requirements. If I want to implement something in Python, I need a lot of memory and space but Weka is very lightweight. Anyone can implement any kind of algorithm, and we can show the results immediately to the client using the one-page feature. The client always wants to know the story. They want the result."
"I like the machine algorithm for clustering systems. Weka has larger capabilities. There are multiple algorithms that can be used for clustering. It depends upon the user requirements. For clustering, I've used DBSCAN, whereas for supervised learning, I've used AVM and RFT."
"It doesn’t cost anything to use the product."
"It is a stable product."
"In Weka, anyone can access the program without being a programmer, which is a good feature since the entry cost is very low."
"The path of machine learning in classification and clustering is useful. The GUI can get you results. No programming is needed. No need to write down your script first or send to your model or input your data."
"The interface is very good, and the algorithms are the very best."
"Working with complicated algorithms in huge datasets is really easy in Weka."
 

Cons

"To do what we want to do with Elastic Search, the queries can get complex and require a fuller understanding of the DSL."
"The UI point of view is not very powerful because it is dependent on Kibana."
"There were also some difficult times with parallel and point-in-time interfaces, so better documentation could help, particularly more example-driven content."
"This product could be improved with additional security, and the addition of support for machine learning devices."
"Pagination in Elastic Search is very slow."
"It needs email notification, similar to what Logentries has. Because of the notification issue, we moved to Logentries, as it provides a simple way to receive notification whenever a server encounters an error or unexpected conditions (which we have defined using RegEx​)."
"The solution's integration and configuration are not easy. Not many people know exactly what to do."
"The setup is somewhat complicated due to multiple dependencies and relations with different systems."
"The product is good, but I would like it to work with big data. I know it has a Spark integration they could use to do analysis in clusters, but it's not so clear how to use it."
"Not particularly user friendly."
"Weka is a little complicated and not necessarily suited for users who aren't skilled and experienced in data science."
"The visualization of Weka is subpar and could improve. Machine learning and visualization do not work well together. For example, we want to know how we can we delete empty cells or how can we fill in the empty cells without cleaning the data system and putting it together."
"If you have one missing value in your dataset and this missing value belongs to a specific attribute and the attribute is a numeric attribute and there is only one missing data, whenever you import this data, the problem is that Weka cannot understand that this is a numeric field. It converts everything into a string, and there is no way to convert the string into numerical math. It's really very complicated."
"Weka could be more stable."
"The filter section lacks some specific transformation tools. If you want to change a variable from a numeric variable to a categorical variable, you don't have a feature that can enable you to change a variable from a numeric variable to a categorical variable."
"If there are a lot more lines of code, then we should use another language."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is an open-source product."
"The premium license is expensive."
"This is a free, open source software (FOSS) tool, which means no cost on the front-end. There are no free lunches in this world though. Technical skill to implement and support are costly on the back-end with ELK, whether you train/hire internally or go for premium services from Elastic."
"The version of Elastic Enterprise Search I am using is open source which is free. The pricing model should improve for the enterprise version because it is very expensive."
"The pricing model is questionable and needs to be addressed because when you would like to have the security they charge per machine."
"An X-Pack license is more affordable than Splunk."
"we are using a licensed version of the product."
"This product is open-source and can be used free of charge."
"The solution is free and open-source."
"Currently, I am using an open-source version so I don't know much about the price of this solution."
"We use the free version now. My faculty is very small."
"As far as I know, Weka is a freeware tool, and I am not aware if they have an online solution or if it is a commercial product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Indexing and Search solutions are best for your needs.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
7%
Educational Organization
15%
University
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise44
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

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?
On the subject of pricing, Elastic Search is very cost-efficient. You can host it on-premises, which would incur zero cost, or take it as a SaaS-based service, where the expenses remain minimal.
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
While Elastic Search is a good product, I see areas for improvement, particularly regarding the misconception that any amount of data can simply be dumped into Elastic Search. When creating an inde...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

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.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Elastic Search vs. Weka and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.