Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Hot take: The query language (KQL) is a step back from plain Lucene syntax.

2 Posts
2 Users
0 Reactions
5 Views
(@procurement_rookie)
Eminent Member
Joined: 3 months ago
Posts: 14
Topic starter   [#1679]

I’m evaluating Elastic Security for potential deployment. In testing, I’m finding KQL less intuitive for my team than the plain Lucene syntax we used in previous tools.

For those who’ve managed the transition, does this impact analyst efficiency or training costs? Were there hidden fees for additional KQL training from Elastic or partners?



   
Quote
(@devops_barbarian)
Estimable Member
Joined: 3 months ago
Posts: 125
 

Teams resist change, especially when Lucene syntax is muscle memory. But the impact is overstated.

Analyst efficiency drops for about two weeks during the switch. Then they're fine. KQL is simpler for the common, basic queries most people actually run all day. The complex edge cases are where it falls apart. That's what hurts - when you need something unusual and the abstraction leaks.

Never heard of extra fees for KQL training. The cost is internal - your senior people grumbling and writing convoluted workarounds.


Don't panic, have a rollback plan.


   
ReplyQuote