Learn how Maple and OpenObserve differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these performance monitoring (apm) 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

OpenObserve appears to have several advantages over Maple, particularly in popularity, growth, maturity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
OpenObserve significantly outpaces Maple in community adoption with 21,174 stars compared to 1,692 stars on GitHub. This 12.5x difference suggests OpenObserve has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, OpenObserve has 1,032 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
OpenObserve is growing faster, adding 893 stars in the last 30 days (+4.4%) against adding 32 stars for Maple (+1.9%). OpenObserve is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Maple last updated 1 day ago and OpenObserve 24 hours ago.
OpenObserve has been in development longer, starting 4 years ago, compared to Maple which began 6 months ago. This 3.1-year head start suggests OpenObserve may have more mature features and established processes.
OpenObserve is licensed under AGPL-3.0, while Maple's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Performance Monitoring (APM), Log Management.
Both Maple and OpenObserve offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.