Opsview Reviews

The dashboard, which gives us real-time monitoring, is the most valuable feature for us.

We are now providing visual representations for our big data solutions. This "ticks the boxes" for our customers who have been asking for Operational Dashboards for years. Because they are so easy to set up, we are able to set them up pretty quickly.

It's probably the priciest option of all its main competitors.

I've used it for two years.

We've haven't had any issues with deployment.

We have had no issues with the stability.

There have been no issues scaling it.

The onsite support we had during the initial implementation was excellent. Their knowledge was excellent and everyone took time to explain the technology as they were working on the solution. I just wish I could have had more time with them.

We are using it alongside Opsview, which we use to monitor our virtual infrastructure.

As with all new products we have had a few teething issues. As we have expanded and gained experience with the product our lessons learned have made things easier.

It is a little more expensive than some of the other options we looked at, but the dashboard features are much better than any other product we looked at, especially when we moved to v5.

We also evaluated Nagios XI and Nagios Core.

Plan your deployment options carefully. The dashboards are the real value add for this product in my opinion and enhance customer experience if done properly. Which in turn builds relationships. Most customers are not too worried that you have a 100 events in the system. They need to know and understand that their service is running and available. Look at automation opportunities to speed up deployment processes -- Puppet, Chef, etc.

The multi-tenancy that's available through this is one of the most valuable things. We have a whole lot of people who want to do their own monitoring and we are able to offer it up as a service to them, manage the infrastructure side of everything for them, and then give them their own little slice of this. They can take advantage of the distributed components that we have around the world and let them set up their own hosts. That's one of the big features that we really like about it. That's the number one thing.

We tried to find something else and we really can't find something that has that multi-tenancy that's easy to use, especially from the end user's perspective.

We now have the ability to offer that out as a service. People come to us and say we need to monitor this test bed. We're able to give that to them ,which in the past would have required me or my colleague to work with them and implement that monitoring and then support it going forward too. There was no self-service there at all and we'd always get engaged. It's allowed us to be able to focus on other things while this is providing that service. It's given us some time back, which would be the biggest benefit.

There is one feature that I've been requesting for a while now. Going back to this multi-tenancy thing, right now the tenants can't create their own service checks, so that's still a process they have to get with us. Once we get a check in place, they can then utilize that check across all of their hosts. It's like a one-time thing to set that up with them. It would be nice if they could even implement their own service checks and there was some way to introduce that into the distributed system from a tenant perspective, not just a global admin perspective. That's one feature that I think is missing and I've mentioned it quite a few times to the guys over in their ops unit.

Another thing that we thought would be kind of neat, would be if there was some kind of integrated logging service. We've got this distributed system already in place and I know it's a monitoring service, but it would be kind of cool if there was something that could catch syslogs. It could have a module in there to view the syslogs from all of the different sites and use that as a syslog aggregate or something along those lines. It would be kind of like what Splunk does. If we could get that functionality inside of here, because we've already got all of these things around the world and if we could just leverage that to do this, then that would be kind of neat too.

We've used it for about two years.

For the most part it’s stable. We had some issues when I took the product over from an engineer who left and we were dealing with scalability. We had to address how it was architected. Opsview was pretty good about getting with me and helping me to come up with a plan and correct that. When we rolled out that solution, it's been pretty rock solid ever since. We haven't had many stability issues.

Every once in a while, we'll hit some kind of weird, wonky bug or something like that and we'll get with them, and either there's a fix or there will be a fix and some update or something along those lines.

We had a scalability problem about a year-and-a-half ago where the number of monitored hosts was growing and the database was not able to keep up. But going forward, I don't see any problems with scalability. The downside of continuing to add more sites and distributed slave components at those sites is that reload times increase. I have to continue to use Nagios to prevent this, but it would be nice if it didn't have to be this way.

As we scale, we could set up slave clusters, which has worked.

Nine times out of ten, you put the ticket in, you get with somebody who's very knowledgeable and is able to help. I think maybe once or twice there's been a ticket where we didn't get the attention. But I think that's probably going to happen anywhere.

Overall, I'd say it's been very good and they've been very responsive. Right now, we're going through an upgrade process that requires a big migration. I put a ticket in and they contacted me within 30 minutes. It was not the exact resolution that I needed, but at least they started the conversation.

We have to set it up again because we're migrating and upgrading, which is complex with many moving pieces. We're moving from v4 to v5 and I have to learn the differences and the underlying components.

Without prior experience, setup would be pretty complex. v5, however, offers an auto-installation function, making new installations a whole lot easier. The problem is that we have existing employees still using v4, so the auto-installation doesn't work for them, and we need to get down into the nitty gritty.

As long as you have your expectations on what the system is, then it'll probably meet those expectations. But if you want it to do things that are beyond what it's designed to do, you might need to look at something else.

I like its scalability thanks to slaves. You can add as many slave as you want, which also allows you to reach and monitor devices running on the network that are not accessible by the master. It also has good roles management which is very useful for a service provided to customers. Lastly, it also has a nice GUI.

Before we used Nagios. It's based on Nagios too, but the biggest benefit when compared to it is the simplicity to set up and modify devices.

SNMP traps management to be improved. It's not so easy to use and you have to pay more to get the SMS module.

I've been using it for 30 months.

We have had no issues with the deployment.

There have been no performance issues.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

We used Nagios previously, and it was reliable but hard to configure, and even harder to create a master/slave configuration.

Considering the complexity of our network, it wasn't hard to install. It would be preferable if you have some Linux knowledge prior to the implementation.

We implemented it in-house via our Data Center Team.

As a CSP, we have an MSP agreement so that we can pay for its use. It means that additional customers will pay additional fees, and this is invaluable.

Get a good book so you can get exposed to all the great functionality in PostgreSQL. I would highly recommend looking at the postgresql.conf configuration settings when you are ready to go into production. In order to get a good price, I think that you need to have a commercial process in place.

• Easy setup hosts
• Easy configuring service checks
• Very easy-to-use interface, especially starting from v5 onwards
• Advanced tweaking possibilities
• Netflow

It's helping to actively monitor our systems.

• Easier expansions
• Better documentations
• Having tabs inside, 2F authentication
• Incorrect documentation for version 5.0
• Lack of tabs in Opsview GUI
• Unnecessary configuration and manual setup for slave appliances which can be configured by Opsview inside the VM

I've been using it for seven months.

We haven't had issues with our deployments.

Often the webpage becomes inaccessible and you need to refresh the page.

With the way the service checks work, you need to perform lots of manual setups to create specific service checks and templates for each host.

6/10

I used Icinga in my previous company.

The initial setup is straightforward if the documentation is correct.

Get the silver package for enterprise.

No other options were looked at.

Devise the exact templates you want to create before messing it up.

There are various features in Opsview that our organization finds valuable. We love the accurate alerting, graphs, and customization of alerts.

It has improved our up time and we are better able to identify issues before users find out.

I would like to see a bit more with the Jasper Reporting, but not a major issue.

I've been using it for three years; however, our organization has been using it for over five years.

No deployment issues.

No stability issues.

No scalability issues.

Customer service is great; always responsive, within minutes at times.

Technical support is great; have yet to have an issue that wasn't resolved within a day.

We previously just used plain old Nagios. Opsview did way more of what we needed.

Initial setup was straightforward.

An in-house team implemented it.

Make sure to consider scaling and what features you actually need.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate other options.

Great solution.

• Alerting and notification features
• Unlimited users
• Timed notification profiles

Our support team are more responsive to failures and potential problems by using the Opsview Monitoring System.

MySQL

I have used it for 5+ years.

Sometimes Opsview has crashed, but the multiple master/slave solution provides consistent uptime for monitoring.

No scalability problems – we have 300+ devices.

We have received good support.

I did not previously use a different solution.

Initial setup was midway between straightforward and complex.

• ManageEngine
• Big Brother

Take the time during setup to configure all of the services and options for your devices. The new GUI is much improved.