https://github.com/metrico/qryn
Aside - with so much to choose from wrt logs and metrics - I'd assume "prometheus for logs" implied "pulling" log data (rather than push). While maybe "Victoria metrics for logs" might imply "easier to operate, efficient, fewer moving parts".
I also have seen a trend over the years of companies who adopt AGPL not caring about the open source community around the code. This is not specific to the AGPL, and not every user of it does so, but I see it correlating more often.
Many companies refuse to use AGPL licensed code... some claim their lawyers are stupid and don't know what they are doing... but it can still prevent adoption of AGPL licensed products.
So, it means that I don't get to use awesome looking toys at work because no one is going to pay the lawyer fees to find out what, exactly, we can and can't have those network requests touch
I have been trying to be much more careful in commentary about this because I'm not trying to change the author's license, it's their code, and I'm not trying to get into debates about "well, it only matters if ..." because IANAL and I don't want to assume the risk, because for this situation, being wrong would be very expensive, so I just stick to Apache or MIT tools
My comment wasn't a call to action, it was just crying out loud
I imagine you've seen apenwarr's blog post on logging: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20190216
With that in mind I'd like to read more about the architecture. Specifically:
1. Do you have separate components for ingest and querying that can be scaled independently?
2. How dumb is the log ingest path?
As Developers, SRE, DevOps look to replace Elastic from their logging stack - we believe the log storage of future won't be another search and indexing engine in a new language.
Parseable leverages Apache Arrow, Parquet and widely available object storage platforms for efficiency, cost effectiveness and performance.