USE CASES·ENTERPRISE

REPLACE THE
STACK.
KEEP THE DATA.

Five enterprise workloads. One binary. No Logstash, no Beats, no separate vector database, no dedicated Kibana cluster. Each section below is a real deployment pattern with measured numbers against Elasticsearch 8.13 — and a live chart from the product dashboards.

01
SECURITY
ANALYTICS
AT SCALE.

Your SOC team spends more time waiting for dashboards than investigating threats. The battery on the right runs 8 canonical SIEM queries — top source IPs, auth-failure clustering, lateral movement, brute-force detection — with measured latency on 1M events. XERJ is the yellow bar. Elasticsearch is the gray one.

74× FASTER SIEM QUERIES
CISO · SOC ANALYST · SECOPS
FULL USE CASE →
SIEM QUERY BATTERY · P95 LATENCY · 1M EVENTS
XERJ ES 8.13
Top source IPs 0.4 ms 29.8 ms 74.5×
Auth failures / hour 0.3 ms 18.2 ms 60.7×
Lateral movement 1.2 ms 45.1 ms 37.6×
DNS tunneling 0.8 ms 32.7 ms 40.9×
Process tree anomaly 2.1 ms 89.3 ms 42.5×
Data exfil > 10 MB 0.6 ms 22.4 ms 37.3×
Brute force detection 0.5 ms 41.0 ms 82.0×
Geo-impossible login 1.8 ms 67.2 ms 37.3×
02
OPERATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE.

Ship logs at line rate. Query hot data in milliseconds. No ILM policy puzzles, no shard tuning, no Logstash pipeline. The chart shows sustained ingest throughput over 24 hours — 80K docs/s from a single client, diurnal traffic pattern, zero write-stalls.

80K DOCS/S SUSTAINED
SRE · DEVOPS · PLATFORM ENGINEERING
FULL USE CASE →
INGEST THROUGHPUT · 24H · SINGLE CLIENT
00:00 · 20K docs/s min 20K docs/s · peak 82.51K docs/s 20K docs/s · 24:00
03
AI-NATIVE
SEARCH &
RETRIEVAL.

Hybrid semantic + keyword search in one query. The cluster plot shows 830K real queries grouped into six intent clusters — RAG retrieval dominates. Every cluster is one index query away, not a separate Pinecone call. The memory comparison below shows the cost of running vectors at scale.

4× MEMORY SAVINGS · 1 QUERY
ML ENGINEER · DATA SCIENTIST · AI PLATFORM
FULL USE CASE →
MEMORY · XERJ SQ8 vs ES + PINECONE (FLOAT32)
XERJ (SQ8) ES + PINECONE
1M × 768-dim 1.2 GB 4.6 GB 3.8×
5M × 768-dim 5.8 GB 23 GB 4.0×
10M × 1536-dim 18 GB 92 GB 5.1×
04
ELASTICSEARCH
REPLACEMENT.

Same API on port 9200. Same query DSL. Same client libraries. The comparison shows what changes: memory, disk, cold start, config surface, and component count. Yellow is XERJ. Gray is a 4-node Elasticsearch cluster doing the same job.

21× LESS MEMORY · 80% TCO
VP ENGINEERING · CTO · PLATFORM TEAM
FULL USE CASE →
RESOURCE COMPARISON · XERJ vs ES 8.13 (4-NODE)
XERJ ES 8.13 (4-NODE)
Idle memory 400 MB 8.5 GB 21.3×
Disk (1M SIEM) 1.1 GB 3.1 GB 2.8×
Cold start 50 ms 15 s 300.0×
Config knobs 47 3,000+ 63.8×
Binaries to run 1 5 5.0×
05
UNIFIED
OBSERVABILITY.

Logs, traces, and metrics in one store. The comparison shows the operational surface: one binary vs six, one config vs twelve, one query language vs three, one bill vs five. OTLP in, Prometheus out. No Grafana-Loki-Tempo-Mimir stack to babysit.

6 SYSTEMS → 1 BINARY
OBSERVABILITY LEAD · SRE · INFRA
FULL USE CASE →
OPERATIONAL SURFACE · XERJ vs TRADITIONAL STACK
XERJ SPLUNK + PROM + TEMPO
Binaries 1 6 6.0×
Config files 1 12 12.0×
Query languages 1 3 3.0×
Storage backends 1 3 3.0×
Retention policies 1 3 3.0×
Monthly bill lines 1 5 5.0×
READY?·REQUEST ACCESS

RUN IT ON
YOUR DATA.

Leave a work email and we'll reply within one business day with a private binary, the reproduction scripts, and a 45-minute walkthrough.

We only use this email to send you the binary. Ever. ✓ THANKS. CHECK YOUR INBOX WITHIN 24 HOURS.