No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Elastic Search vs Oracle Big Data SQL comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Indexing and Search (1st), Search as a Service (1st), Vector Databases (2nd)
Oracle Big Data SQL
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
27th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of Elastic Search is 1.7%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Big Data SQL is 1.2%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Elastic Search1.7%
Oracle Big Data SQL1.2%
Other97.1%
Cloud Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2817942 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Engineer at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Logging and vector search have transformed observability and empowered reliable ai agents
Elastic Search is not specifically being used for certain purposes. I deploy Elastic Search database on the cloud and use cloud services so that nobody can attack. However, I do not use Elastic Search to resolve attack issues. The basic main purpose of Elastic Search, as of now, I feel it can do more in the AI area. Sometime I saw that when I am developing RAG and have to generate the embeddings, which I call metadata, sometimes it tries to fail. That durability or issue handling should be improved, but apart from that, I did not find anything as of now. As per my use case, whatever I am using seems pretty good. Apart from that, some definitely improvement will be there. One improvement is that it should be faster. Whenever I am searching any logs, it takes much time. For example, if I open my log in Notepad or a similar tool, I can search the text within a second. With Elastic Search, it takes a little bit of time, ten to fifteen seconds. That can be improved. Sometimes, engineers take time to assign when I create a ticket.
Mohamed Moustafa - PeerSpot reviewer
General Manager at Quit cement
Offers good scalability, strong stability and seamless integration
The user interface is really user-friendly and intuitive. It was a major plus. The integration process was smooth. Oracle's security is good and significantly better than that of other solutions I've encountered. Previously, we had separate data interfaces for 15 concrete mixing plants, requiring manual document creation in Oracle. Now, with integrated automation, production has become much easier and more efficient over the past three years.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Elastic Enterprise Search is user behavior analysis."
"The most valuable features are its user-friendly interface and seamless navigation."
"Elastic Search makes handling large data volumes efficient and supports complex search operations."
"From a technical point of view, there are no significant issues recalled as Elastic Search has been absolutely awesome for this use case and covers 100% of the needs."
"A nonstructured database that can manage large amounts of nonstructured data."
"The most valuable feature is the out of the box Kibana."
"I would recommend Elastic Search to other people who want to have fast search in their applications."
"The products comes with REST APIs."
"The user interface is really user-friendly and intuitive."
"This solution can maintain a large volume of data and is flexible to what data it can handle. The performance is very good."
"This solution can maintain a large volume of data and is flexible to what data it can handle."
 

Cons

"Maybe Elastic Search could improve the analytics part of the search so it can be more powerful to the user."
"Better dashboards or a better configuration system would be very good."
"Enterprise scaling of what have been essentially separate, free open source software (FOSS) products has been a challenge, but the folks at Elastic have published new add-ons (X-Pack and ECE) to help large companies grow ELK to required scales."
"We had initially planned to expand use of ELK because of its cheap price and the services that are included, but given the difficulty with implementation we've decided to go with Nagios instead."
"However, they could simplify how the YML files have to be structured properly."
"Elastic Enterprise Search could improve its SSL integration easier. We should not need to go to the back-end servers to do configuration, we should be able to do it on the GUI."
"Dashboards could be more flexible, and it would be nice to provide more drill-down capabilities."
"I found an issue with Elasticsearch in terms of aggregation. They are good, yet the rules written for this are not really good."
"The solution could improve by adding more advanced features."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing."
"The solution could improve by adding more advanced features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"​The pricing and license model are clear: node-based model."
"It can move from $10,000 US Dollars per year to any price based on how powerful you need the searches to be and the capacity in terms of storage and process."
"We are using the free open-sourced version of this solution."
"The solution is free."
"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."
"The pricing structure depends on the scalability steps."
"The solution is affordable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Construction Company
23%
Comms Service Provider
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise47
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ELK Elasticsearch?
When it comes to pricing, I think we had to pay AWS approximately 1,000 to 1,200 per month for the overall stack. I am not quite certain about how much Elastic Search costs specifically because I w...
What needs improvement with ELK Elasticsearch?
Elastic Search has many features, including Kibana and Logstash, which we regularly use. However, one downside in our product is cost, as it can be expensive when maintaining multiple shards and in...
What is your primary use case for ELK Elasticsearch?
As a developer, I use Elastic Search in developing one of my applications, basically integrating the back-end with Elastic Search. Our main use case for Elastic Search is for Logstash, which is a s...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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. Oracle Big Data SQL and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.