We performed a comparison between InfluxDB and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"In our case, it started with a necessity to fill the gap that we had in monitoring. We had very reactive monitoring without trend analysis and without some advanced features. We were able to implement them by using a time series database. We are able to have all the data from applications, logs, and systems, and we can use a simple query language to correlate all the data and make things happen, especially with monitoring. We could more proactively monitor our systems and our players' trends."
"The solution is very powerful."
"The most valuable features of InfluxDB are the documentation and performance, and the good plugins metrics in the ecosystem."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is we can use InfluxDB to integrate with and plug into any other tools."
"The most valuable features are aggregating the data and integration with Graphana for monitoring."
"InfluxDB's best feature is that it's a cloud offering. Other good features include its time-series DB, fast time-bulk queries, and window operations."
"InfluxDB is a database where you can insert data. However, it would be best if you had different components for alerting, data sending, and visualization. You need to install tools to collect data from servers. It must be installed on Windows or Linux servers. During installation, ensure that the configuration file is correct to prevent issues. Once data is collected, it can be sent to InfluxDB. For visualization, you can use open-source tools like Grafana."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to use. It provides a clear overview of the data, making it simple to understand the information at hand."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"It is simple."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I've tried both on-premises and cloud-based deployments, and each has its limitations."
"InfluxDB can improve by including new metrics on other technologies. They had some changes recently to pool data from endpoints but the functionality is not good enough in the industry."
"InfluxDB is generally stable, but we've encountered issues with the configuration file in our ticket stack. For instance, a mistake in one of the metrics out of a hundred KPIs can disrupt data collection for all KPIs. This happens because the agent stops working if there's an issue with any configuration part. To address this, it is essential to ensure that all configurations are part of the agent's EXE file when provided. This makes it easier to package the agent for server installation and ensures all KPIs are available from the server. Additionally, the agent cannot encrypt and decrypt passwords for authentication, which can be problematic when monitoring URLs or requiring authentication tokens. This requires additional scripting and can prolong service restart times."
"In terms of features that I would like to see or have, in the community version, some features are not available. I would like to have clustering and authentication in the community version."
"The solution's UI can be more user-friendly."
"InfluxDB cannot be used for high-cardinality data. It's also difficult and time-consuming to write queries, and there are some issues with bulk API."
"The solution doesn't have much of a user interface."
"The error logging capability can be improved because the logs are not very informative."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
InfluxDB is ranked 37th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 8 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. InfluxDB is rated 7.6, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of InfluxDB writes "A powerful, lightweight time series database with a simple query language and easy setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". InfluxDB is most compared with MongoDB, Cassandra, Netdata, ScyllaDB and Zabbix, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our InfluxDB vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
