We performed a comparison between InfluxDB and Zabbix 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."
"The solution is very powerful."
"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."
"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 most valuable features are aggregating the data and integration with Graphana for monitoring."
"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."
"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 of InfluxDB are the documentation and performance, and the good plugins metrics in the ecosystem."
"Zabbix is scalable."
"We like the user-interface for this solution, which makes it an easy to use tool."
"Zabbix is a cost-effective solution. We're a small organization with a few dozen devices to monitor, and it was available for free. We can see what we need. We haven't done an in-depth analysis on it, but we're currently okay with the product."
"I'm supervising all the IT departments, and Zabbix seems quite good for them. It provides graphics and information in real time. We get alerts about crashes on the system, enabling us to quickly repair issues. We can easily find devices with problems."
"The most valuable feature is the protocol to manage anything."
"The pricing of the product is reasonable."
"The solution is quite mature and very stable."
"Zabbix is good for discovery."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"The error logging capability can be improved because the logs are not very informative."
"I've tried both on-premises and cloud-based deployments, and each has its limitations."
"The solution doesn't have much of a user interface."
"Implementation is always tailored to the customer and the kind of information we need from the client to carry it out can make them very uncomfortable. Sometimes the clients are not ready to share it."
"The user interface could be a bit better. They could update it a bit."
"I would like to see a more flexible mobile client, and better HA out of the box."
"In terms of user-friendliness, large maps could be more interactive. We should be able to click on some areas and move some objects. It would make it simpler to see things while analyzing some dedicated parameters."
"It would be helpful if they translated the documentation to Cyrillic languages."
"The event correlation could be better."
"The only improvement I would suggest, revolves around its AI and ML capabilities."
"The System Center Operations Manager can be improved."
InfluxDB is ranked 36th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 8 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 1st in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 96 reviews. InfluxDB is rated 7.6, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. 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 Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". InfluxDB is most compared with MongoDB, Cassandra, Netdata, ScyllaDB and Meraki Dashboard, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios XI and Nagios Core. See our InfluxDB vs. Zabbix 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.