34 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
34 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
# Backend storage
|
||
The SkyWalking storage is pluggable. We have provided the following storage solutions, which allow you to easily
|
||
use one of them by specifying it as the `selector` in `application.yml`：
|
||
|
||
```yaml
|
||
storage:
|
||
selector: ${SW_STORAGE:banyandb}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
## BanyanDB - Native APM Database
|
||
- [BanyanDB](storages/banyandb.md)
|
||
|
||
BanyanDB is a native-built SkyWalking database, which can completely focus on SkyWalking use cases.
|
||
It has demonstrated significant potential for performance improvement and reduced resource usage requirements. It indicates 5x less memory usage,
|
||
1/5 disk IOPS, 1/4 disk throughput, and 30% less disk space, albeit with a slightly higher CPU trade-off, compared to Elasticsearch.
|
||
|
||
## SQL database
|
||
- [MySQL and its compatible databases](storages/mysql.md)
|
||
- [PostgreSQL and its compatible databases](storages/postgresql.md)
|
||
|
||
MySQL and PostgreSQL are recommended for production environments for medium-scale deployments, especially for low trace
|
||
and log sampling rates. Some of their compatible databases may support larger scale better, such as TiDB and AWS Aurora.
|
||
But the logs and traces performance could be significantly lower than BanyanDB and Elasticsearch, even more, their performance can't be improved linearly
|
||
through scaling out nodes.
|
||
|
||
## Elasticsearch+
|
||
|
||
- [OpenSearch](storages/elasticsearch.md#opensearch)
|
||
- [ElasticSearch 7 and 8](storages/elasticsearch.md#elasticsearch)
|
||
|
||
Elasticsearch and OpenSearch are recommended for production environments, especially for large-scale deployments.
|
||
OpenSearch derived from Elasticsearch 7.10.2 and iterates by its own roadmap. But notice, Elasticsearch cluster resource costs are high,
|
||
due to its high requirement for memory and replication requirement to keep cluster robustness.
|