Process Exporter vs Apache SkyWalking
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted monitoring & status options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Process Exporter
Prometheus exporter for per-process metrics
VS
Apache SkyWalking
APM and observability for cloud-native architectures
| Feature | Process Exporter | Apache SkyWalking |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Monitoring & Status | Monitoring & Status |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, kubernetes, helm |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,137 | ★ 24,915 |
| First released | 2016 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Datadog Agent | New Relic, Datadog |
Why pick each one
Choose Process Exporter if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (2.1k GitHub stars)
- Written in Go
Choose Apache SkyWalking if…
- Full observability suite
- Strong Apache governance
Frequently asked questions
Is Process Exporter or Apache SkyWalking better?
Neither is universally better. Apache SkyWalking has the larger community, while Process Exporter is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Process Exporter and Apache SkyWalking free and open-source?
Yes. Process Exporter is licensed under MIT and Apache SkyWalking under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Process Exporter and Apache SkyWalking with Docker?
Process Exporter: yes. Apache SkyWalking: yes.