Datadog Reviews

We primarily use the solution for the service catalog.

We use this type of offering for our Microservices applications, and it gives a good view of flow. It is a must when we have different developers working on different services.

Having the trace and log features are useful for locating the microservice for the on-call person.

We would like to see some more useful applications for health monitoring where we can customize the cases based on data from the database.

It needs to have the facility to monitor data inside tables and the status of the UI.

The service catalog helped improve our organization by giving a good view of the flow for our microservices applications. It's important when we have different developers working on different services and having the trace and log features help the on-call person locate the microservice.

The application performance monitoring has also been useful. This module had a few functionalities that we needed for the application health check. This needs to have some more features to consolidate the view in one tree. We may need more of a one-stop shop on top of the dashboard, and that is missing in Datadog. We'd like to be able to scrap our existing monitoring tool.

The service catalog is very useful. We use this type of offering for our Microservices applications, and it gives a good view of flow. It is a must when we have different developers working on different services. Having the trace and log features have been useful in order to locate the microservice for the on-call person.

The dashboard is great. It is helpful to get a view of specific things that we need to monitor for our application. It has been a good way to watch specific things and add them together.

The application performance monitoring is an excellent aspect. This module had a few functionalities that we needed for the application health check. This needs to have some more features to consolidate the view into one tree, however.

The dashboard could be improved. It would be helpful to get a view of specific things that we need to monitor for our application. However, it was a good way to watch specific things and add them together.

The application performance monitoring module had very few functionalities that we needed for the application health check. This needs to have some more features to consolidate the view into one tree.

I've used the solution for one month. 

We previously used ITRS Geneos.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

We use this solution for our customer's IP and to support their cloud infrastructure.

Datadog is easy to use and easy to deploy. It's a better solution compared to others on the market in terms of being budget friendly for our customers.

Datadog could be improved if it could detect other software in a container or server. Datadog is better than other APM or observability tools, but it focuses mostly on telling the customer what they need to know about the software, database or applications that land on the server. We also need to know the version before setting up an agent with the APM modeling tool.

In some instances, the owner of a particular software changes to another person and this person did not originally transfer the knowledge or data to manage the server. The new person needs to monitor this server and they need to know what software or version of software was installed on this server before they used the APM agent for monitoring. If datadog could provide this insight, it would improve how we use the solution. 

In a future release, we would like to be able to complete a network traffic or network flow analysis to detect the errors or problems on the network.

I have been using this solution for two years. 

This is a stable solution. 

The initial setup was straightforward. We needed two engineers for the deployment.

This solution is budget friendly.

Overall, Datadog is a good product to use and is easy to deploy.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

The solution is basically used for servers and applications.

The UI, basically, is the most valuable aspect of the solution. I really like the look and feel of the solution. It's not very distinctive now since other players have caught up, however, they were the first in the market to present such an effective UI. 

The many dozens of integrations that the solution brings out of the box are excellent.

It's easy to set up.

Deploying the agents is still very manual. 

Network monitoring could be better or rolled into this solution so that you do not have to buy a different product.

Customization of the tool itself should be taken into account. At the moment, although what they provide out of the box is good, they don't offer many customization possibilities. I know it's difficult, however, it's something that they would need to look at. When the customer gets some customization, they want customized requirements. We cannot do it. 

I've been dealing with the solution for five years. 

It's quite stable. I have never had an issue in regard to reliability, so it's very stable.

It's very scalable. I have not reached the limits at any time, never in the solution. I've never seen any performance degradation in large environments. I would say it's very scalable.

Each client has its own instance. We do not share instances with multiple customers. There's usually between 20 and 30, depending on the customer.

I never use technical support, to be honest.

The initial setup for the solution itself is quite straightforward. You just set it up and that's it. However, when it comes to, for instance, deploying the agents to the servers, or at least the target machines, it's still a manual task. They still do not have centralized management of the FD agents, which basically delays the deployment of the solution. It's very manual still.

How long it takes to deploy is difficult to pin down. It will vary based on the environment size. Obviously, if it's ten servers, it will basically take half an hour or one hour. If it's 5,000, obviously, besides the number of notes, other considerations will need to be taken into account. If t's a large environment, it will take much longer. We would need to basically develop a solution, or an effective process to deploy the agent and configure them in a standardized manner. This is something that the tool itself or the tool provider does not offer out of the box. You need to build it. That's a drawback.

How many people you need for the deployment and maintenance processes depends on the environment's size and geographical area. On average,  I would usually require for every 500 notes, one resource for implementation. Then for overall support, I usually put one resource per 1500.

Before, the ROI was much higher as you would not have to compete with any kind of tool since they were very good in the space. However, with time, other companies have picked up the slack. Now, you have other tools which provide a higher ROI. I cannot give a specific ROI percentage since I don't use it for personal use with deployment. We deploy it on behalf of customers. Obviously, depending on the deal, depending on the size, and the ROI will vary. If people are looking for a global monitoring solution in the same tool as Datadog network monitoring, they are always hindered as Datadog does not provide an adequate solution for it. That kind of decreases the ROI since you still need to get another tool to do the network monitoring.

The licensing is a bit complicated. When you pay for it on a note basis, that's perfectly fine. However, when you put log analytics on top of it, it's based on traffic. This is actually an issue. It gets complicated.

I'm providing Datadog. I'm a retailer.

I would recommend the solution. 

I would suggest if their environment is in the cloud, companies have their environments in the public cloud, such as GCP, Azure, or AWS. Datadog is a very good candidate to provide an overview of the monitoring. If you want to consider a hybrid solution where systems and servers and applications also provide a good solution and have a lot of APM capabilities, the only drawback will be network monitoring. When you grab a tool that you want to basically monitor the entire environment at a single point of contact, with Datadog, it's possible, however, there's not an effective tool to do network monitoring.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I used Datadog typically for monitoring website statistics and some of the cloud networking equipment.

The most valuable features are the dashboards and the reporting.

I have been using this solution for approximately three years.

I found the solution to be stable, I did not experience any bugs or glitches. However, some of the managing team did.

The scalability of the solution was good. Being a cloud solution, if there was an issue with the scalability it would be easily fixed with an update.

We have approximately 200 users using the solution in my organization.

I did not need to use the support.

I was previously using SolarWinds in the company I was working with before.

I rate Datadog nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for centralized dashboarding and telemetry viewing for teams across the organization. 

We're focused on ensuring that both development teams and leadership can reasonably gain insights into the status of various systems. 

At the end of the day, managing various dashboards and metrics aggregators like Prometheus, Kubernetes server, AWS Cloudwatch, and Grafana have lead to some confusion, and we've had issues with teams not knowing where their data exists and where they can view their system metrics. 

Datadog has proven to be easy to set up and legible for both development and operational teams.

The solution has been useful in generally ensuring that teams are able to better visualize and think about their application's impact on data centers/cloud performance. Having centralized tooling for observability means that each team can be on the same page when discussing monitoring. 

There have been some issues where teams have been unable to find metrics within the tool properly and some behaviors with the tagging and grouping functionality that seem not to be as easy to understand as one may expect. That said, overall, the experience has been one that is positive.

The dashboards have proven most helpful in ensuring that teams can track the performance of their apps. On a more practical scale, the alerts have proved invaluable for triaging and bringing services back online.

Being able to tie the alerts generated through Datadog monitors has allowed us to quickly and effectively respond to infrastructure and software issues that would have otherwise hamstrung the organization and prevented us from accomplishing our day-to-day tasks. This is naturally invaluable.

I'm sure that this is said all the time, however, the pricing model has led us to restrict the usage of the service. If there were a more cost-effective manner of deploying the tool, we'd be more likely to adopt it more widely. 

Aside from the cost, the nature of the tagging and grouping features within the monitoring dashboards have often caused headaches when creating new dashboards for aggregate services and infrastructure stacks. It would be nice to ensure that this feature is supported long-term and brought with easier accessibility.

I've been using the solution for three years.

Datadog is easy to use and generally looks great from a customer standpoint. The ability to export metrics all into a central location was crucial.

Datadog is very expensive for smaller organizations. The pricing model might be restrictive until the organization reaches a certain size.

Primarily we did an evaluation of other providers, such as AWS and GCP, outside of in-house solutions.

We mainly use the product to monitor our infrastructure and apps. It is the go-to tool when we want to check that things are running properly. We use Datadog synthetic monitors to ensure our app works across different locations in the United States. 

We also have set up Datadog monitors to send alerts if things stop working as expected. 

We use Continuous Integration Pipeline visibility to make sure our developers are not being blocked by infrastructure and other things that might be out of their control.

Datadog helps us detect issues early on and helps in troubleshooting. Creating Service Level Objectives and defining monitors is helping us to stay on top of potential issues that might affect our users. 

We take advantage of Application Performance Monitoring to ensure our applications are working as expected, and our users can get the healthcare they need at a price they can afford. 

Synthetic monitoring also helps us in testing our application in different browsers.

The most valuable aspects of the solution include: 

CI visibility, which helps us in making sure our CI systems are running efficiently and are not blocking our developers from releasing new software and fixing bugs.

Logs, which help us in debugging issues where we can search for logs and can make sure they are relevant to the issues we are looking at.

APM, which can help us to stay on top of our applications by giving us the confidence that our apps are running.

Monitoring. We use monitoring a lot to ensure we know about potential issues and fix them before they affect our customers.

Overall, we really like the quality and relevance of all of the Datadog products that are currently being used. 

The documentation is very well organized and is the go-to place for us to find answers to our questions. 

We would really like to see more from the Service Catalog. It is something that we are interested in. However, some might think it lacks some key features at this time. We will definitely keep our eye out for this and adopt it when all the features are implemented. 

We're really looking forward to all the great things DD will do.

I've used the solution for three years.

The stability is great.

The scalability is great.

Technical support is great.

We handled the initial setup in-house.

I don't have any insights into pricing.

We use Datadog to monitor our Kubernetes clusters. 

We have 3 different clusters for different parts of the SDLC. We run the Datadog agent DaemonSet as well as the Datadog cluster agent. Our services have the APM installed by default. 

To create monitors, we use Terraform. This is provided out-of-the-box for our service owner. 

We run EKS on top of K8s, therefore, we also make use of some of the AWS monitoring capabilities that can be integrated into Datadog. 

We are hugely reliant on Datadog for all aspects of our system.

With Datadog, we were able to gain observability in our system. 

The installation step is pretty straightforward. 

It's easy to use by non-DevOps users. For instance, our engineers do not interact with K8s often; therefore, it is hard for them to debug. However, with Datadog, they are able to view their containers and deployments with a single click. 

We also heavily use the tags to help us identify who the service owners are. This is super useful when we need to track owners for patching or pick up new features we implemented.

The APM and K8s monitoring are the most valuable aspects of the solution. The K8s monitoring allows all customers to view their infra, even if they do not use K8s daily. They can just click on a few tabs to get all of the information they need. 

It is also very easy to install on our system. APM has helped debug applications on our system as well. We were able to view why a service has suddenly shut down.

We also use Datadog for SLOs/SLAs as well. We check the live endpoint of services to ensure they are still up and running.

There is not much that needs to be improved. 

The UI is super user-friendly. The deployment process is easy. We enjoy using the integrations with Slack and PagerDuty. 

Customer support is awesome from our experience. There is a lot of documentation for us to be able to use if we need to. 

I'm not sure if Datadog can monitor K8s deployments in real-time. For instance, being able to see a deployment step by step visually. This would be helpful if there were any incidents during the deployment. 

In general, Datadog is a great solution.

I've used Datadog since I joined my company about a year ago.

We haven't had issues with the stability.

The scalability is really great.

We've had no issues with the product or support. 

The initial setup is super simple, and the documentation was helpful.

We managed the initial setup process in-house.

We've witnessed ROI in our DevOps.

We primarily use Datadog for alerts. If we're running out of database connections or CPU credits we want to find out in Slack. Datadog provides nice features for that.

Secondarily, we use Datadog for analyzing historical trends and forecasting potential issues.

I'm trying to learn how to add in Continuous Profiler in our primary backend servers and set up Synthetic Tests for monitoring our front end.

Everything is mostly on AWS, and the Datadog integrations help a ton.

Datadog has helped us a ton by allowing us to set up a multitude of easily configurable alarms across our tech stack and infrastructure. It doesn't matter if it's in AWS Lambda or a Docker container in AWS EC2, Datadog's intuitive interface makes alarms incredibly easy to configure, reducing our resolution time for incidents.

A lot of the value comes from how frictionless the integrations are. Adding in a Datadog agent or flipping a switch on the Datadog UI to start streaming Lambda data makes the product so incredibly appealing for my company.

The monitoring feature has been the most valuable.

I really like the dashboard. Monitoring has a straightforward tie-in to business value at my company (i.e. declaring incidents, etc). Things like having a dashboard and APM make my job easier. That said DevX is a little bit of a harder sell to executives in my company.

The dashboard feature makes it so easy to inspect multiple metrics at once across services. It's truly been a lifesaver when I'm personally trying to understand why performance degradation is happening.

I found the documentation can sometimes be confusing. I tried configuring APM for some of our Python containers, and I had to cross-reference multiple blog posts and the official documentation to figure out which Datadog-agent to use. If I needed a ddtrace trace, what environment variables I should set, etc. 

Furthermore, to generate my own traces, I wasn't aware that ddtrace adds its own "monkey patching," which led to headaches with respect to configuring the service for RabbitMQ.

A more unified and up-to-date documentation suite would be greatly appreciated.

I've used the solution for about two years.

I don't recall seeing an incident from Datadog in the past couple of years and that's been wonderful.

The solution is incredibly scalable! To be fair, our data throughput to Datadog isn't super huge, however, we have never seen issues as it scaled to handle more of our data.

We used to use AWS Cloudwatch for a lot of our monitoring needs. That said, the interface felt clunky, confusing, and limited.

We don't have hard numbers on ROI. That said, overall, it has been a wonderful addition to our tooling suite.

We also looked at Honeycomb and are currently using both in production.