Learn how OpenSearch and Quickwit differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these search engines is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
15 hours agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
3.9.0License
Apache-2.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
opensearch
Last 30 days
Last commit
11 hours agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
v0.9.3License
Apache-2.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
quickwit
Both OpenSearch and Quickwit 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 OpenSearch having 13,964 stars and Quickwit having 11,769 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, OpenSearch has 3,088 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
OpenSearch is growing faster, adding 148 stars in the last 30 days (+1.1%) against adding 70 stars for Quickwit (+0.6%). OpenSearch is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with OpenSearch last updated 15 hours ago and Quickwit 11 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with Bash, Python. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: OpenSearch uses Java while Quickwit leverages JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX, Rust.
Both projects started around the same time, with OpenSearch beginning 6 years ago and Quickwit 6 years ago.
Both projects use the Apache-2.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Search Engines.
Both OpenSearch and Quickwit offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.