Learn how Logstash and OpenObserve differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these log management tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Both Logstash and OpenObserve have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with Logstash having 14,926 stars and OpenObserve having 21,315 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, Logstash has 3,504 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
OpenObserve is growing faster, adding 1,005 stars in the last 30 days (+4.9%) against adding 19 stars for Logstash (+0.1%). OpenObserve is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Logstash last updated 7 hours ago and OpenObserve 7 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with CSS, Bash. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Logstash uses Python, C, Java, Ruby while OpenObserve leverages JavaScript, Typescript, SCSS, Rust, Vue.
Logstash has been in development longer, starting 16 years ago, compared to OpenObserve which began 4 years ago. This 12.4-year head start suggests Logstash may have more mature features and established processes.
OpenObserve is licensed under AGPL-3.0, while Logstash's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Log Management. However, they also have distinct specializations: Logstash also focuses on ETL & Data Integration, Stream Processing while OpenObserve extends into Performance Monitoring (APM).
Both Logstash and OpenObserve offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.