0
0
ElasticsearchComparisonBeginner · 4 min read

Logstash vs Ingest Pipeline: Key Differences and When to Use Each

Logstash is a standalone data processing tool that collects, transforms, and ships data to Elasticsearch or other destinations, while an Ingest Pipeline is a lightweight, built-in Elasticsearch feature that processes and transforms data during indexing. Logstash offers more complex processing and plugin support, whereas Ingest Pipelines are simpler and run directly inside Elasticsearch nodes.
⚖️

Quick Comparison

This table summarizes the main differences between Logstash and Ingest Pipeline in Elasticsearch data processing.

FeatureLogstashIngest Pipeline
TypeStandalone data processing toolBuilt-in Elasticsearch feature
Processing LocationExternal server or containerInside Elasticsearch nodes
ComplexitySupports complex pipelines and pluginsLightweight and simpler processors
Performance ImpactSeparate resource usageRuns within Elasticsearch, minimal overhead
Use CaseData collection, enrichment, routingSimple transformations during indexing
Plugin SupportWide variety of input, filter, output pluginsLimited set of processors
⚖️

Key Differences

Logstash is a powerful, standalone tool designed to collect, parse, and transform data from many sources before sending it to Elasticsearch or other systems. It runs independently from Elasticsearch, allowing complex workflows with many plugins for inputs, filters, and outputs. This flexibility makes it ideal for heavy data processing and enrichment tasks.

In contrast, an Ingest Pipeline is a feature built directly into Elasticsearch that processes documents as they are indexed. It uses a set of predefined processors like grok, rename, or date to perform simple transformations. Because it runs inside Elasticsearch nodes, it has less overhead but is less flexible than Logstash.

Choosing between them depends on your needs: use Logstash for complex, multi-source data processing and routing, and use Ingest Pipelines for lightweight, inline document transformations during indexing.

⚖️

Code Comparison

Here is an example of how to parse a log line with Logstash using the grok filter to extract fields.

logstash
input {
  stdin {}
}

filter {
  grok {
    match => { "message" => "%{COMBINEDAPACHELOG}" }
  }
}

output {
  stdout { codec => rubydebug }
}
Output
{ "message" => "127.0.0.1 - frank [10/Oct/2000:13:55:36 -0700] \"GET /apache_pb.gif HTTP/1.0\" 200 2326", "clientip" => "127.0.0.1", "ident" => "-", "auth" => "frank", "timestamp" => "10/Oct/2000:13:55:36 -0700", "verb" => "GET", "request" => "/apache_pb.gif", "httpversion" => "1.0", "response" => 200, "bytes" => 2326 }
↔️

Ingest Pipeline Equivalent

This is the equivalent Ingest Pipeline in Elasticsearch that uses the grok processor to parse the same log line during indexing.

json
{
  "description": "Parse Apache log",
  "processors": [
    {
      "grok": {
        "field": "message",
        "patterns": ["%{COMBINEDAPACHELOG}"]
      }
    }
  ]
}
Output
{ "clientip": "127.0.0.1", "ident": "-", "auth": "frank", "timestamp": "10/Oct/2000:13:55:36 -0700", "verb": "GET", "request": "/apache_pb.gif", "httpversion": "1.0", "response": 200, "bytes": 2326 }
🎯

When to Use Which

Choose Logstash when you need to collect data from multiple sources, perform complex transformations, enrich data with external lookups, or route data to various destinations beyond Elasticsearch.

Choose Ingest Pipeline when you want simple, fast transformations directly inside Elasticsearch during indexing without managing an extra service. It is best for lightweight parsing and field modifications.

In summary, use Logstash for heavy-duty data processing and Ingest Pipelines for efficient inline document processing.

Key Takeaways

Logstash is a standalone, flexible tool for complex data processing before indexing.
Ingest Pipelines run inside Elasticsearch for lightweight, inline document transformations.
Use Logstash for multi-source data collection and enrichment.
Use Ingest Pipelines for simple parsing and field changes during indexing.
Choosing depends on processing complexity and infrastructure preferences.