Topic starter
11/11/2026 6:04 pm
TL;DR: Telemetry growth is pushing Splunk costs up faster than many enterprises can forecast, Apica reports, because ingestion-heavy models punish noise and duplication. Pipeline control shifts the decision point earlier, where teams can route, reduce and standardise data before indexing.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Apica: “How Apica Flow Dramatically Reduces Your Splunk Costs in 2026”.
By the numbers:
- Apica says Splunk invoices can grow 25–40% annually before optimisation.
Key questions
Q: What is the difference between telemetry filtering and telemetry routing?
A: Telemetry filtering decides whether a data item is kept, sampled, or dropped before it is stored or forwarded.
Q: How does OpenTelemetry help control vendor lock-in in observability pipelines?
A: OpenTelemetry helps control vendor lock-in by using standard instrumentation, semantic conventions, and collector pipelines that can export the same telemetry to multiple back ends.
Q: How do teams reduce observability ingest costs without losing signal quality?
A: Teams reduce observability ingest costs by filtering at the collector, dropping low-value events, sampling high-volume traces, and normalising data before storage.
Practitioner guidance
- Classify telemetry by business value before ingestion Define which log, metric and trace streams must land in premium analytics, which can be transformed, and which should be routed elsewhere.
- Apply pre-index filtering to high-volume sources Drop duplicate events, trim verbose fields, downsample noisy metrics and suppress low-value debug output before data reaches the backend.
- Separate security telemetry from routine telemetry Create routing rules that preserve investigative signals in Splunk while sending lower-value streams to object storage or cheaper tools.
Bottom line: Uncontrolled telemetry growth can turn observability platforms into cost multipliers when every source ships raw data directly into premium analytics.
Glossary terms: Telemetry pipeline, Pre-Index Filtering, OpenTelemetry, Telemetry routing
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
11/11/2026 6:06 pm
Telemetry governance is now a budget-control problem, not just an observability problem. When pipelines feed premium analytics platforms without intermediate policy, organisations pay for duplicate, low-value and over-verbose data at scale. That shifts telemetry from an engineering detail into a governance domain where finance, security and platform owners need a shared control point. Practitioners should treat ingestion policy as part of the security architecture, not as a downstream optimisation task.
A question worth separating out:
Q: When should organisations send telemetry to cheaper storage instead of a SIEM?
A: Organisations send telemetry to cheaper storage when the data has low real-time value, long retention needs, or is mainly used for later investigation rather than active alerting. Security logs that support threat hunting often stay in a SIEM, while verbose application traces, debug logs, and routine metrics can move to lower-cost object storage after filtering and indexing.
👉 Read our full editorial: Pipeline-level telemetry filtering cuts Splunk overage costs