Hi, I think this question is pointed towards Elasticsearch,
But here are some points for SigNoz. ( I am one of the maintainers at SigNoz)
> Directly ingesting to disk(hot tier) is faster than directly ingesting to s3(cold storage)
> The query results were an average of cold + hot run ( for elk as well ). We didn’t have an explicit concept of warm storage for SigNoz in our benchmark.
> The query perf for logs with cold storage is almost similar to hot storage, but the operational cost will reduce with cold storage. So ingesting to host storage and moving to cold storage after a certain amount of time is a good option for Signoz.
But here are some points for SigNoz. ( I am one of the maintainers at SigNoz)
> Directly ingesting to disk(hot tier) is faster than directly ingesting to s3(cold storage)
> The query results were an average of cold + hot run ( for elk as well ). We didn’t have an explicit concept of warm storage for SigNoz in our benchmark.
> The query perf for logs with cold storage is almost similar to hot storage, but the operational cost will reduce with cold storage. So ingesting to host storage and moving to cold storage after a certain amount of time is a good option for Signoz.