DataSnap vs Grafana Loki
Grafana Loki aggregates logs with label‑based indexing to reduce indexing costs. DataSnap focuses on managed analysis/visualization with predictable costs and AI, without maintaining extra components.
We keep the comparison updated, but exact prices must be confirmed directly on Grafana Loki.
Official sources
We recommend validating directly in Grafana’s official documentation before any decision.
- Grafana LokiConcepts and architecture of Loki
- Grafana Cloud PricingGrafana Cloud plans and pricing
Reference: datasnap.cloud
DataSnap differentiators
- Managed analysisReady platform to search, filter and visualize data.
- Predictable costsClear model with automatic optimizations.
- AI dashboardsNatural language queries and SQL‑like interface.
Reference: datasnap.cloud
Positioning vs Grafana Loki
- Labels vs ready visualizationLoki optimizes indexing via labels. DataSnap delivers ready visualization with AI.
- OperationLoki often requires operating components. DataSnap reduces friction with a managed service.
When should you choose DataSnap over Grafana Loki?
If operating Loki and its stack is heavy for your team, this summary helps see where DataSnap best fits.
Operating components consumes time. DataSnap simplifies: ingestion + processing + retention.
Important: consider specific observability requirements.
- Teams wanting managed analysis without operating Loki or pipelines
- Need for predictable costs and retention governance
- Per‑client/tenant consumption separation with transparency
- You need to reduce indexing cost with labels and already operate Loki well
- Dependence on Grafana stack with deep integrations
- Team masters Loki and prefers to keep current architecture
DataSnap complements when managed analysis and predictable costs are the priority.
- Start with 1 service to compare consumption and analysis
- Use matching periods/log levels for a fair comparison
- Evaluate partial migration or hybrid use with Loki