Without having thought much about this, surely datadog only want to store your data and have you pay for the storage/indexing/querying? I guess your worry is something like datadog making themselves the only possible backend? I don’t feel like that’s a very big risk – I think trying it would just lead to a fork of vector. Perhaps a more realistic risk is that vector would implicitly assume datadog’s constraints, eg (making these up without knowing much about datadog) field types or required information or the expected number of unique fields across all messages.
Yeah the trick is if they can lock you into a stack that sits everywhere in your apps, it’s very expensive to switch vendors, letting them extract high rents. This is what happened with the Datadog agents.
In that context, OTEL is an existential threat, because it makes them a commodity. Then it becomes relatively clear why they wouldn’t put OTEL support in the Vector roadmap.
Given my experience with Datadogs pricing lock-in-and-switch, yeah 100% I’d rather run agents that allow me to pick the collection backend than another tool from Datadog.
FridgeSeal|1 year ago
NewJazz|1 year ago
dan-robertson|1 year ago
jakewins|1 year ago
In that context, OTEL is an existential threat, because it makes them a commodity. Then it becomes relatively clear why they wouldn’t put OTEL support in the Vector roadmap.
datadeft|1 year ago
jakewins|1 year ago
Given my experience with Datadogs pricing lock-in-and-switch, yeah 100% I’d rather run agents that allow me to pick the collection backend than another tool from Datadog.
lokar|1 year ago