We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Database Monitoring and OpenText SiteScope based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ability to discover and track transactions."
"The solution is great for database monitoring. You don't have to install an agent on the database. You just install the server to a database agent. It's a good product for some database administration if you don't want to install an agent on the database for security."
"The most valuable features of AppDynamics Database Monitoring are you can configure the performance and see in real-time what is exactly happening with the applications. Additionally, the dashboards are good."
"To be honest, it's a fantastic product."
"The good thing with AppDynamics Databases is that it will give you a pretty good overview of the data, all the database-like tables, long-running queries, jobs running on the databases, and the queries that are taking more time. So, it's at a deeper level with all the database functionalities, and you will get that information. So, it's a pretty good tool in that sense."
"AppDynamics Database Monitoring's most valuable feature is the ability of the out-of-the-box to update the information, provide various metrics, and possibly include custom metrics."
"AppDynamics Database Monitoring's dashboarding is its best feature."
"Data monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"The product's drawback is the licensing pricing. It could be better."
"The application end of AppDynamics Database Monitoring needs to improve by checking which applications consume licenses."
"The major concern lies with reports, specifically their configurability. It's like, if I want to combine multiple reports and generate them all at once, that's not possible. Even though there's a setup for generating 25 reports, I wanted to group them all and generate them in one go, which isn't currently feasible. I have to manually run each report and set the time for it."
"The application monitoring needs improvement. It needs to be easier for someone who isn't a proficient developer."
"The solution needs to support IBM products."
"I have found it sometimes a bit difficult to trace the transaction all the way through to the application. I'm not sure if that problem is on the database side or on the application side, but that would be something that I would like to be improved. The traceability from the application to the database, sometimes, is a bit of a challenge. If you're using AppDynamics, with the Java agent, for instance, you need to be able to trace it through."
"The synthetic scripting for end-user monitoring could be a little bit broader. Instead of using just Python, they can include a few other languages so that not everyone has to jump on the bandwagon for Python and do Selenium scripting. They can open up that a bit to make it simpler for people to do the scripting."
"The user access management could be a bit better."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"I would be very interested in having transaction traceability included in the product, to give us a better view of what is really going wrong in a particular method and action."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
More AppDynamics Database Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Database Monitoring is ranked 17th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 30 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. AppDynamics Database Monitoring is rated 7.8, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Database Monitoring writes "Good application performance features along with a very simple and tool navigation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". AppDynamics Database Monitoring is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Dynatrace, AppDynamics and AWS X-Ray, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our AppDynamics Database Monitoring vs. OpenText SiteScope report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.