Datadog Reviews

We’re currently using logging, monitoring, metrics, APM, etc.  

We've started to use קSLOs. However, it takes a bit of time to work through those.

RUM (Real User Monitoring) has been very useful. I have used this in the past to debug problems in production, which has been great.

We also want to start using synthetics and tracing more. 

Our application currently runs in many different environments based on our customers' requirements. This allows us to see everything in one place and still filter by the environment as required, which is extremely useful. 

The solution has offered increased visibility via logging APM, metrics, RUM, etc. Going from almost nothing to something that didn’t take a lot of time to set up has been great since we have so little time to spare

As a startup, we have limited resources, and no one has enough time for anything. There are so many easy integrations and things configurable by YAML making everything easy to set up without needing a full-time employee. Just configuring monitoring solutions is very desirable. 

The APM is very useful for tracking down anything that’s gone wrong. I’ve been using it to make sure everything is working correctly after deployment, to make sure we don’t suffer performance degradation, and to track down anything that’s gone wrong in real-time  

The logs are great and necessary for any application. Before this, our solution would have been to SSH into a machine and tail log files. This is untenable for many reasons, and one of the first things I wanted to change.

The RUM is useful for seeing how real users interact with our website.

Sometimes it’s difficult to customize certain queries to find specific things, specifically with the logging solution. I’ve used other logging platforms in the past that have extensive and mature query languages, which might not be super friendly to start out with, yet they can be very powerful. I wish there was more of an emphasis on that instead of the UI-based tooling that Datadog provides. Even though it is powerful on its own, UI-based design lacks the elegance, efficiency, and complexity that something like that can provide. 

I've been using the solution for six months or so.

We did not previously use a different solution.

I don’t handle the licensing or pricing.

We did look into Splunk.

We primarily use the solution for charting application metrics.

We use it for all our application metrics, host metrics, and monitors with a PagerDuty integration. 

We integrate our application logs. It is great to be able to tie our metrics and our traces together.

We use the APM module with traces. It is great to be able to link APM, logs, and metrics in one go, as it shortens our troubleshooting and RCA dramatically.

We are loving the tool; it is great to have all those insights in one place. 

We hope that they keep making my life and our engineers' life easier.

The solution improved our organization with:

• Data-driven decision making
• Dashboards we can share with our customer success team
• Dashboards we can share with our sales engineers
• Help during incidents
• Help with preventing incidents
• Integration with PagerDuty.

The most valuable aspects of the solution include:

• The charting application metrics
• help with the business, prioritization, software design, and infrastructure design.

The pricing model hurts and forces us to work around the tool sometimes.

On top of application performance metrics, it would be great to have host performance metrics, suggesting changes to better use a cluster like: "You are over-provisioning this host" or "based on historical data, you will need to scale up in X days."

Adding a module to extract data from Datadog so we can use the data in our own system would be helpful.

I've used the solution for six or more years.

We previously used New Relic, which was a great tool. That said, Datadog is a more complete solution.

The pricing should be less of a surprise. They should allow us to cap costs which would lead to less frustration.

We need better documentation on the pricing.

It might be helpful if they added a pricing simulator.

We primarily use the dashboard/metric with many tags.

It makes the system easier to debug. 

We really like the charts and visualization.

Sometimes, it takes a long time to load the dashboard if we have many charts.

I've used the solution for five years.

Our company is transitioning to using the solution for monitoring and analytic services we provide to customers. Once fully rolled out, there will be 80-100 users companywide. 

The solution's SaaS model is easy to manage and works well in single- or multi-cloud environments. 

The Saas format can handle heterogeneous or multi-language applications much better than using a combination of tools. 

Graph filters for logs need to be set manually which works well for JSON but not for unstructured logs. 

Making structured logs for high-performance applications is over our heads so we had to dump some technical streams for our logs. 

I recently started using the solution. 

The solution is stable and passed an our internal assessment.

The solution is scalable. 

We received product support through the sales department and they were helpful. 

The solution is better than what we previously used. 

The initial setup is straightforward which is impressive.

I rate setup an eight out of ten. 

We implemented the solution in-house and are continuing to roll it out. 

Licensing is based on the retention period of logs and metrics. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We are using the solution from a monitoring and management perspective. We use it for alerts.

The solution's real-time user management and session analytics as well as the APM, are the solution's most valuable aspects.

We could easily identify the production box, and we could handle alerts.

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

It's stable. 

They have flag integrations, mail integrations, and other options as well.

We didn't do a deep analysis on this at this moment to identify the disadvantages.

We have noticed that Session Replays are unavailable on the mobile app. We'd like mobile app integrations. They could have better log reporting. That said, almost everything that we require is there. 

We've only used the solution for two months. We just wanted to understand the complexities and the benefits that we might get from this product.

The solution is stable and reliable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It may be scalable. However, we haven't actually tested anything. 

We have six or seven people on the solution at any given time. They're there to handle fixes or do an analysis of logs or monitor the infrastructure.

I'm not sure if we plan to increase usage. We are not growing very rapidly. We're just preparing our environment for the upcoming year. 

We've dealt with support. They are helpful and responsive. 

Positive

We have used AWS CloudWatch and AWS inbuilt application of the features, however, we thought that it will be good to have a separate application to do all these kinds of monitoring and to have something for handling alerting mechanisms.

We are looking for the best available platforms on the market, which also would give us better flexibility while having everything come from one place. We found that Datadog is good enough for now, and we are still exploring what it can do and our options. We are not completely in with Datadog. We've been exploring it only for four or five months.

It's an easy product to set up. The integration was very smooth and they have multiple options. It was pretty good integration-wise.

The setup itself only took a day or two. It doesn't take long. 

We handled the setup ourselves in-house. We did not need any outside assistance. 

For some features, it was quite expensive. For example, APM and RAM, and Session Replays. We are using it in a very limited way and are not using it for every microservice. We are using it for a minimal budget. As we are at an exploratory phase and are doing pay-as-you-go. Once we feel confident, we will likely get a yearly license. 

We are customers.

We're working on the latest version. I couldn't recall the version number.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. I need to evaluate the solution further. 

We use Datadog for application monitoring, to help identify errors. It is also used to monitor application performance.

It helps organizations to understand User Experience with user behaviour pattern

Helped to reduce production issues in a defined timeframe

Helped to refine UX

Datadog has a very good visualization for my complete infrastructure and network traffic, which enabled me to create a capacity plan.

This product is great because it shows you the SQL and your application request in a single view.

The error traceability is an area that can be improved. This is something that helps us to pinpoint the area where a problem is occurring. It is a function stack, and it should be showing us how each function is defined.

We have been using Datadog for the past couple of Years.

I have not worked on it long enough to properly comment on stability, yet, because it has to be tested across my other platforms.

We have not done a full evaluation yet, but given that it is cloud-based, DataDog has to be scalable.

I have not needed to contact technical support.

Positive

We were using New Relic prior to implementing Datadog. In terms of application monitoring, Datadog is not up to the level that New Relic is. It is a better product but the price is too high, which is why we switched.

Yes. It is not complex. It allows you to get a certification of DataDog prior deployment of associates to administration and configuration

Inhouse. We got our Admin team certified.

Time to resolution production issue

The price is better than some competing products.

NewRelic

This is a good product and I can recommend it to others, although New Relic is still my first choice. Datadog is my second choice.

Overall, it is a good product and my main complaint is that it needs better error traceability.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I like Datadog because it is so easy use, I can easily connect to public clouds, and I have a view of observability. In my opinion it's the best tool in the market.

I like the interface so much. The interface and the integrations make it so easy to connect to the cloud or to the on-premise environment. It has so many monitors for alerting. I like all the versions and especially the APM model, on which I did a lot more testing with my applications. I have made applications for testing the tool that is in the resource. The APM is the goal for me in the Datadog.

In terms of what could be improved, Datadog does not have the feature where you can monitor external websites or check the SSL secure for websites.

I have been using Datadog for the last 14 days.

In terms of stability, I don't have any problem with its stability or the website data. They have a solid infrastructure. I don't have any problems with that.

It was simple to configure and to set up this tool.

I have less experience with Zabbix than I have with Datadog, but I don't see Zabbix as a great tool for cloud specific monitoring because I cannot connect so easily to public clouds to gain all the information that I can in Datadog, which I can easily set up.

I have used Zabbix for 20 days for my personal tests and I really don't like it.

There is something that I liked with Zabbix, though. Zabbix is better for monitoring virtual machines. That's a feature that I liked. But everything else is awful. I can't have dashboards. I do not have integrations with some ITSM systems, like Jira or OTRS. It's awful because I need to have those integrations.

I would rate Zabbix a nine from one to ten for on premises environments. For cloud platforms, I rate this tool as a five, because of the complexity required to integrate it in other platforms.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Datadog a nine, just because of the missing feature of checking websites.

I'm not sure which version we're using, although I believe it to be the latest. 

We essentially use the solution in advance of performance testing, performance monitoring, and troubleshooting.

The solution affords us many uses when it comes to troubleshooting and application. Should we encounter issues while troubleshooting under load, we can take advantage of Datadog usage metrics to see which method or area is having difficulty, in order that we may resolve the issue. 

The solution has valuable troubleshooting and instrumentation features. 

The setup was a bit complex. 

As Datadog is a bit on the expensive side, I would recommend it for simple, uncomplicated, solutions.

I have been using Datadog for nearly four or five years. 

The solution is sufficiently stable. 

As our company does not have many users who are making use of the solution at present, I have not encountered issues with its scalability. 

I do not have plans to increase the usage at the moment. 

I cannot comment on tech support, as I have not made use of them, although my team members have. It seems okay. 

We mainly work with Datadog, although with Dynatrace, as well. 

The initial setup was a bit complex. 

We hired a separate team to handle the implementation. 

At present, not much staff is needed for the deployment and maintenance. 

I am not in much of a position to address the question of return on investment, although I believe it is for the better that my organization employs the solution.

I do not have knowledge of the licensing costs. 

As Datadog is a bit on the expensive side, I would recommend it for simple, uncomplicated, solutions. 

We are just the users of the solution. There are not many of us in our company. 

The solution is good for complex integations which have lots of downstream and involve multiple combined systems. This is where it is useful. 

I rate Datadog as a nine out of ten.