logging24 stores your logs once, then lets you search incidents, create
metrics, and alert on the same underlying data. The result is an
observability approach centered on
faster answers
,
less pipeline work
, and
lower cost
.
Where observability is often split into logs, metrics, and
traces as separate signals, logging24 uses one retained source of truth so
those capabilities reinforce each other instead of living in separate
systems.
Search, metrics, alerts, and long retention in one tool at a fraction of the cost
Good observability starts with being able to answer operational questions quickly. logging24 keeps full log detail searchable with fast regex-based queries, so teams can investigate incidents without waiting for re-indexing, field modeling, or preplanned dashboards.
Many observability stacks force teams to decide in advance which fields deserve metric pipelines. logging24 takes the opposite approach: keep the raw events, then extract numeric values when the need appears. That makes new metrics possible during an incident, not only before one.
Observability is most valuable when the unknown question arrives. With one retained dataset, teams can come back later with new search patterns, grouping keys, and derived metrics instead of rebuilding collection rules or reprocessing old data.
Observability architecture should get simpler as systems grow, not more fragile. logging24 uses one forwarding path and one query model from single-host setups to multi-terabyte environments, so teams spend less time stitching tools together and more time operating systems.
The observability benefit is not “more telemetry types.” It is having one place where troubleshooting, monitoring, and alerting reinforce each other. logging24 uses retained log events as the shared source so teams can move between investigation and monitoring without switching mental models or data stores. In practice, that means the traditional signals still matter, but they are powered from the same underlying data: logs remain the raw evidence, metrics are derived when needed, and trace-like correlation can be pursued directly from the recorded events.
A useful observability platform has to remain economically viable at retention and throughput levels real teams need. logging24 keeps one copy of the data, avoids indexing overhead, and offers predictable pricing so teams can retain detail without treating observability as a luxury.
Search incidents, derive metrics, and follow correlation paths in the same environment instead of splitting logs, metrics, and traces across separate stacks
The question is not how many tools you can connect, but how much work they create
| Outcome | Fragmented stack | logging24 |
|---|---|---|
| Incident response | Search depends on pre-indexed fields and multiple tools | Search retained raw logs directly |
| New metrics | Requires separate metric design and collection | Extract from logs when the need appears |
| New questions | Often means schema or pipeline changes | Query existing retained data again |
| Operational complexity | Multiple agents, stores, and query languages | One forwarding path and one core query model |
| Data retention | Tradeoffs between cost, sampling, and fidelity | Keep one full copy of raw events |
| Cost control | Index-heavy pricing and duplicated storage |
€0.25/GB stored
€50/PB queried |
| Hosting model | Varies by vendor and stack composition | Fully managed, EU-hosted |
If you want search, metrics, and alerts without more pipeline work, we can walk through how logging24 fits your current stack.
Tell us what you need to investigate, measure, or alert on. We can map the platform to your current observability setup and the benefits you care about.