Azure Monitor Reviews

We primarily use the solution for Application Insights logging, Database logging, etc. We also use it to analyze charts on the dashboard to get an overview of the issues found in the logs. The solution helps us in monitoring, analytics, and logging.

With the solution's help, we can detect database performance issues, like which tables are missing in the indexes on some columns, etc. It helps us monitor timeout in the database, such as performance issues of the queries. If the queries timeout in five minutes, we can analyze the problem with the help of Application Insights. We can detect the problem of a specific step or reason responsible for letting the application fail or crash. For example, if the application crashes during Selenium's end-to-end test on the UI, we can find the reason by going through the logs.

The solution has tons of valuable features.

They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool. Presently, we are not able to catch the transaction logs. The preview mode is available only for dedicated SQL servers and not for a database pool. They should improve this particular area of the solution. 

They should add a built-in feature for tracing the request and responses. Currently, it does not get measured automatically, and we need to write down the custom solution to check the request and the responses in the logs. They should create a log utility to log the request and send it to the Application Insights in the integration as a custom attribute. 

There should be default parameters and headers, which we can customize. It'll be beneficial because, at present, we only have responses, but not the requests. It is the solution's downside.

We have been using the solution for six years.

I rate the solution's stability as a five for the European region and ten for other regions.

I rate the solution's scalability as a ten.

A part of the setup process was straightforward. At the same time, a part of the process required some guidance because the Azure monitor evolves constantly. Most of the time, the blog post or guidance article on how to set up gets outdated quickly. Sometimes many things don't work as expected or as written in the Microsoft documentation.

If you have a solution built on Microsoft technology, go for Azure Monitor. I rate it as a nine out of ten.

We have multiple customer internet-facing applications, so we require granular control of each of the data flows. That is something this product helps with.

The ease of use and direct integration with various products have been very useful aspects of the solution that our organization has taken advantage of.

It's easy to configure and easy to integrate with other products.

The initial setup is simple.

Technical support is helpful.

The solution is very stable. 

It can scale.

The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls.

At this point in time, I don't expect them to add many other features. 

I've been using the solution for six months. 

The solution is quite stable. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We haven't had any performance issues. I'd rate the level of stability ten out of ten. 

The solution is auto-scalable. I'd rate its ability to expand ten out of ten. It's a SaaS solution and does not require manual scaling. 

Our user base is about ten individuals. We don't have any more than that on it right now. We do not require it to expand too much in the future. 

Technical support has been great. They are helpful and responsive. 

Positive

I found the initial setup process to be straightforward. 

I'd rate the ease of deployment ten out of ten. The deployment itself was fast and took maybe ten to 15 minutes. 

Just two people were involved in the deployment process. They were regular architects or technical individuals who were part of the deployment.

ONce deployed, the solution itself does not require maintenance. 

We handled the deployment in-house. We did not need any help from outside integrators or consultants. 

I'm not involved in licensing aspects.

That said, my understanding is it is affordable. 

We have a partnership with Microsoft. 

We are always on the latest version of the solution as it is on the cloud. 

I'd advise others it was quite affordable and easy to configure. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We use this solution for basically everything. For example, we use it for infrastructure, application and resource monitoring.

It has good troubleshooting features like automated troubleshooting. It is also a flexible solution and a low-cost product. It includes all the features that are required for multi-cloud and public cloud.

If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill. Sometimes, a lot of data is collected and stored, and we may get charged for that kind of storage which is an issue.

We have been using this solution for more than two years and are currently using the latest version. It is a cloud-based solution and deployed on public cloud. Our cloud provider is Microsoft Azure.

It's stable and constantly updated with new features and functionalities.

It is scalable and can scale to any size. Five people use this solution in our organization, primarily administrators, DevOps and security personnel. It requires about two to three people for deployment and maintenance. We have dedicated people from the monitoring team that do this. We plan to expand the number of users eventually.

The technical support is quite responsive. Microsoft support is pretty good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward and not complex. Deployment took a couple of days, and it was deployed in-house.

We have seen an ROI. It is a helpful tool and provides proactive information about the infrastructure.

We did not evaluate other options. Azure Monitor is one of the most non-native tools from Microsoft, and it's well-integrated.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. I recommend this solution to others. They should try Azure Monitor to see if it fits their requirements gradually. Additionally, there isn't a lot of upfront investment required to set it up.

The configuration could be improved in the next release because it takes a little time. However, they regularly update their scalability and features.

The most valuable features of Azure Monitor are the login analytics workspace and we can write any kind of custom queries in order to receive the data that is inserted into the login analytics workspace, diagnostic settings, et cetera.

Azure Monitor could improve network performance monitoring and make it more advanced.

I have been using Azure Monitor for more than two years.

I would rate the scalability of Azure Monitor a six out of ten.

It might be a case that there are certain services that are not available in other regions, but it's available in certain regions. You can face certain issues in one place and not another. You can't implement the same solution in all the regions. However, it might be a limitation of the cloud provider.

Technical support is good. In terms of supportability, Microsoft gives a good level of support if the company has a business account and an enterprise level of support. I believe that could be sufficient.

The initial setup of Azure Monitor was in the middle range of difficulty.

We did the implementation of this solution. We have automated everything using the infrastructure or provisioned.

There is a team required for the maintenance and support of the solution.

The cost of Azure Monitor application performance should be less expensive.

My advice would be if you can maintain the configurations that you have done, and if you have automated it, then Azure Monitor would be the best solution. The support is anyways good, but if you do not want to maintain the overhead of operations, then it should be outsourced.

I rate Azure Monitor a seven out of ten.

My client used Azure Monitor to monitor the environment in Azure.

The feature that I found most valuable in Azure Monitor is its monitoring abilities. With Azure Monitor, you are able to monitor all of your cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard and create solution-specific alerts that can trigger an email to the team responsible for that specific solution.

The ability to customize is endless. The majority of the data used for creating alerts does not require any agent installed, like so many other monitoring tools.

Azure Monitor is a monitoring solution that you should not miss out on the second you move workflows, solutions, infrastructure, and much more onto the cloud.

Azure Monitor is a complex product because you can use it to monitor different things, and that could be an area for improvement. Having templates by Microsoft added to it is another area for improvement.

What I'd like to be added in the next release of Azure Monitor is an overview of best practices from Microsoft and what they'd recommend users to monitor.

Assigning an alert is another feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution. Currently, you can't assign an alert to anyone, if a server crashed and you need to assign that alert to a specific team, it's not possible.

Azure Monitor is a stable solution.

Azure Monitor is a scalable solution.

The initial setup for Azure Monitor is quite complex. If I would rate its setup from one to five, with one being complex and five being straightforward, I would rate it 1.5.

Azure Monitor is not too expensive. On a scale of one to five, with one being expensive and five being affordable and competitively priced, I'm giving the solution a four.

I have not used the technical support for Azure Monitor.

Azure Monitor relies more on your ability to collect data and make the correct queries, while on-premises solutions rely on an agent and have many templates to choose from.

Azure Monitor is a nice monitoring tool, particularly if you have the skills. I'm rating it nine out of ten, I can't give it a ten because there's still something missing in it.

We all use Microsoft in the company and we are customers of Azure Monitor. 

The product is very good for developers who want to integrate with Visual Studio. The solution provides an overview and high-level information on what hurdles to expect, and which endpoints have problems. 

If Azure Monitor wants to compete with other APM products in the industry, it has to stitch together the information and user flow. It also needs to provide all the information, as you get with Stock Trace, including details related to where the call came from and where the problem lies. That's what we'd like to see. With a solution like Dynatrace, you have a clear path and you know which calls were made before and after the problem, and where the issue occurred. That feature is lacking in Azure Monitor.

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution scales easily. It's not a big deal for Azure Monitor or any other APM product.

With Azure, implementation needs to be carried out in multiple places and you need to add other things to get the information and that's a tedious process. The Dynatrace setup is much easier. 

We made a comparison between Dynatrace on-prem and Azure Monitor as to what each solution offers. Azure is great for developers wanting to integrate with Visual Studio but when it provides Azure monitoring information on the dashboard there is a lot of Google analytics. When it comes to the application performance monitoring information, Azure gives you the overview or high-level information regarding issues and which endpoints have a problem, but it doesn't give you anything in-depth at the matter level.

It's important to know what your requirements are. If you're able to put best practices in place, and need to add SBKs and turn on profiling at the meter level to look into the details, then Azure Monitor can help. But if that's not something you need, Monitor might not be the best solution for you.

I rate the solution six out of 10. 

We're using Azure Monitor end connection as a hybrid model where it's integrated into Dynatrace. Azure Monitor monitors the infrastructure of Azure within our cloud environment. It doesn't give you any explanations or anything like that. It's just metrics, just data. We've integrated this data into Dynatrace so that the Dynatrace system and AI can give accurate response times, performance on metrics, and things like that. 

Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that.

There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. 

It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier.

We have been using Azure Monitor for nine months.

It's pretty stable.

I haven't scaled it. We're still building things.

I didn't personally have to deal with them. I did contact them once or twice earlier on. It was okay. It seemed like the usual Microsoft kind of approach. You submit an email and all of your information, and then you get a response back the next day. I'm sure it would be better if you had a support plan, but I don't know that specifically.

There needs to be a better process or method to deploy and configure it. Currently, there's a lot of manual intervention. It is not really an out-of-the-box solution.

If you want to get help, you will have to pay for it. Otherwise, you just do it on your own. The problem with doing it on your own is that if you're not so familiar with it, then you have to first familiarize yourself with Azure and setting up different alerts, etc. You really don't get a whole lot of these complexities with Dynatrace.

I wasn't a part of Azure deployment. My area of focus is Application Performance Monitoring, and I was involved with that. For the rest of the Azure environment, there were several teams.

There is Azure Monitor, and then there is Azure Application Insights, which is a component of Azure. Azure Application Insights does similar things as Dynatrace, but just not as good as Dynatrace. There's a lot of manual configuration for Azure Monitor and Application Insights, which isn't there with Dynatrace.

I would rate Azure Monitor an eight out of ten. 

We use Azure Data Factory mainly, and we build our own ETR using Databricks. We are a services company, so depending on the requirement for the customer, we use all of Azure's products. We work with infrastructure deployment and want to monitor the health of our deployments.

The metrics and alerts in Azure Monitor allow us to set thresholds on the metrics and receive alerts, providing a good facility for monitoring.

Azure Monitor has metrics and alerts capabilities. It allows you to set thresholds on the metrics and receive alerts. This is an important feature for monitoring.

Azure Monitor could improve by adding capabilities for data observability and integrating more tightly with their data platform components.

I have been familiar with Azure Monitor for the last three to four years.

The technical support by Microsoft Azure is good, however, there is room for improvement in their overall competence.

Neutral

Previously, we used open-source tools before adopting Azure Monitor.

Using Azure Monitor is less of a hassle for existing Azure customers than procuring another product, even if the cost may be slightly higher. Avoiding additional bureaucracy is also easier when using Azure Monitor as part of the existing Azure suite.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.