Datadog Reviews

We use the solution for monitoring our logs across distributed clusters. Right now, we have an Elasticsearch solution that is tied to each platform (our product is a PaaS solution). 

We are looking at moving to a single pane of glass solution, which Datadog would be good for (plus, we could wrap up other tools like Prometheus, Grafana, Pagerduty, Pingdom, and more). We want to be able to have Datadog running on one single cluster and ingesting and processing logs from all our distributed clusters.

So far, we are just in the evaluation stages so it's hard to say how it's improved out organization. However, one positive impact it had is it's been just showing us an example of how to build in observability, metrics, tracing, etc., in a better way. 

Even if we don't end up using Datadog, it revealed problems and optimizations to us that weren't obvious before. One potential reason why it may not help us is that we have strict rules around log parsing and may not be able to send it to an external organizaton for ingestion/processing.

The CPU profiler has been interesting even though it isn't our core use case. 

We are finding that Datadog has way more offerings than originally expected, so we are constantly finding new parts of it that would be convincing to use. 

The log and ingestion are very similar to our current Elasticsearch setup. We find the tracing and overall integration/ecosystem to be the most valuable part. Basically, the CPU profiler is a good example of a value add for a problem we knew we had yet was low priority and had hacky workarounds. The value proposition is in the ecosystem as a whole.

The sheer amount of products that are included can be overwhelming. 

The solution requires better overarching UI, which would make things clearer. Even though I generally dislike the AWS UI, it makes the different services very clear, and it also makes where you are at any given point clear. 

The sidebar for all the different services is a bit much. 

I also found the tagging of logging pipelines to be a bit tedious. It would be great if, once marked up, it would automatically be a first-class citizen in Datadog.

We are still in the evaluation stage and have used it less than one month.

The stability looks good so far.

It seems easier to scale and build app functionality across multiple teams rather than other solutions.

We have used Elasticsearch, Grafana, and Prometheus. We are still evaluating Datadog.

The product has provided good ROI by saving development time as well as time managing setting up ES.

It is somewhat expensive compared to open-source options.

We evaluated Elasticsearch, Grafana, and Prometheus. We are still evaluating Datadog.

We use different tools for log collection and monitoring. Using Datadog will combine different use cases into one product that will be easier to manage. 

The tools we use are open-source, so there is no commercial support. Having customer support would be ideal since we're a small team. 

Profiling would be another great feature to have. Currently, it's manual. Having Datadog would give us a standard, and we don't have to do much manual work.

It will solve a lot of our problems. We have different tools for each of them in our organization; they are open-source and therefore not very well maintained with there is no customer support. 

Having an industry-standard product such as Datadog would be ideal for us as we are short on manpower. Since this is a managed all-in-one product with readily available support, we will be able to focus on application logic rather than figuring out why a tool isn't working.

The biggest thing I liked was the combination of all the things - monitoring, log aggregation, and profiling. We have different tools for each of them in our organization and all of them are open-source. These are not very well maintained and there is no customer support. 

Having an industry-standard product is ideal for us as we are short on manpower. Profiling is another amazing feature. Currently, we rely on some open-source solutions, and it's all done locally. Having it done on Kubernetes would give us more insights and help with performance. Alerting is again a nightmare for us. Datadog solves all of these issues.

It can be overwhelming for new people as it has a lot of features. The UI could certainly be improved. Having less information with better organization could help newcomers. I haven't seen the documentation, however, a well-organized documentation would invite many varied users.

I've been using the solution for three years.

We use it mostly for logging log messages from our Kubernetes and EC2 instances, for example, system messages and errors. Also, we want log messages from our firewalls and other network infrastructure in case of network issues. We intend to use it for application logging, et cetera, to get insight into internal problems in the applications in Kubernetes pods. We want to use it for monitoring in case of system problems and hardware failures so that it can notify us.

It's good to have a single location for all the logs. If you have logs coming from a whole lot of sources, it makes it hard to find where the problem lies. 

We had to spend a lot of time logging into various systems and pursuing a billion different log files looking for something that stands out as a possible cause of the issue. That can take a lot of time and doesn't give much visibility into the possible interactions between systems.

Datadog has a lot of features to be able to drill down deep into the swath of logs that our platforms generate. 

It has a lot of ability to make fancy and deep searches using regular expressions and to graph them into useful and interesting dashboard graphs. 

The plethora of built-in/downloadable integrations make it much easier to set up for our platforms. Otherwise, we'd have to parse the log files ourselves, which would take a great deal of effort. Had to do it before when had to use an ELK stack for logging, which was painful.

Some of the interface is still confusing to use. It has many features, and it takes a lot of effort to figure out what they all mean. Maybe having tooltips or something would be helpful. Also, some of the integrations are better than others.

I've used the solution for a month.

The solution seems very stable.

Have used an ELK stack before. However, it took a lot of effort to maintain, and parsing the logs was difficult.

We implemented the solution in-house.

We are using Datadog for server metrics, log aggregation and searching, system monitoring, alerting the team about errors, and dashboards for our developers. It's used by the Site Reliability Engineering team and Management of all levels. 

It's assisting us in proving SOC II compliance. 

We're looking to improve our usage of Datadog's RUM and APM components to get better and more performance insights on our production environments. 

We're also looking to leverage more synthetic monitors and runbooks for anyone responding to incidents.

The ability to easily drill down into log queries quickly and efficiently has helped us to resolve several critical incidents so far this year, and we heavily rely on a series of dashboards showing us various queues and load on CPU and memory for servers. 

We also have a view of the information required when we begin the patch and/or upgrade processes. 

I've also set up several monitors to alert the Site Reliability Engineering team when various metrics show a server might be reaching capacity. We use it to send an email suggesting we increase the size of the cloud instance.

The ability to easily drill down into log queries quickly and efficiently has helped us to resolve several critical incidents. We heavily rely on dashboards that are showing us various queues and load on CPU and memory for servers. 

We also have a view of the information required when we begin the patch and/or upgrade processes. 

I've arranged several monitors to alert the Site Reliability Engineering team when various metrics show a server that might be reaching capacity. We use it to send an email suggesting we increase the size of the cloud instance.

Datadog could always lower the price! In general, more demos online and maybe more free hands-on tutorials for basic functionality would be good for less technical users. 

I would also prefer more chances to amend the contract more than twice a year. As a smaller but growing company, it can be difficult to adequately predict demand.

I've used the solution for more than three years.

We use the application for our application monitoring, data security monitoring, and log management. What we like about the application is that it helps us to track issues more proactively instead of reactively.

There are other improvements we would like to see.

1. Being able to restrict users from seeing or viewing specific dashboards once they log in

2. They can cut down the prices for Cloud SIEM. It seems very useful, however, the prices are high. Some organizations are finding it difficult to make decisions in terms of getting the tool.

We use the application for our application monitoring, data security monitoring, and log management. It helps us to track issues proactively instead of reactively.

It helps us better manage our logs.

We can effectively track down issues.

We have dashboards that give us an overview of our environment.

The tools I have found useful include the Datadog cloud security posture manager and cloud workload security.

Datadog is a great tool, and we value the services they offer. They should continue expanding and integrating with more third-party apps.

I've used the solution for three years. 

I love its stability.

It is very scalable.

Technical support has been great.

Positive

We previously used AWS.

The initial setup is not too complex.

We've seen an ROI of 50%.

It's a little pricy yet worth it.

We did not previously evaluate another solution.

We use an enterprise version of a CMS platform which is enabling businesses to transmit content to their customers. The tool is fully customizable to the end user, including out-of-the-box integrations as well as APIs for custom plugin support. 

Our systems fully manage content using AWS as the back-end cloud provider. Assets are kept in secure buckets and utilize the Kubernetes infrastructure to deliver our product to end users and internal authors. Using the CMS allows for business people to manage content without needing development efforts.

This tool is the sole purpose of my company and the solutions we provide around it. Enabling customers to manage their content in a fast, reliable, and highly user-friendly setup has been critical to our success. 

Offering our product at SaaS, PaaS, cloud, and on-prem editions has enabled us to provide a solution for all types of customers. 

The platform appeals to companies spanning many industries on a global scale. 

Being based in SUI allows us to secure both the EU and other companies more easily.

The enterprise version of a CMS platform enables businesses to transmit content to their customers. 

The tool is fully customizable to the end user, including out-of-the-box integrations as well as APIs for custom plugin support. 

The content is fully managed within our systems using AWS as the back-end cloud provider. Assets are kept in secure buckets, and we can utilize the Kubernetes infrastructure to deliver our product to end users and internal authors. 

Using the CMS allows for business people to manage content without needing development efforts. Allowing this type of setup for business users has been a key reason for our success.

There is always room for improvement when dealing with cloud-based technologies. Mainly, I would say, it's just increasing our offerings to attract various other types of industries and businesses across more fields. 

New features as requested by our existing customers will help make the product better.

The product was self-developed.

We use a SaaS deployment. 

Ingesting data from various sources to monitor the log metrics of the system and enabling an alert mechanism to notify the teammates if something goes wrong.

More specifically, having Datadog agents as integration to different services provides easy access and management.

The solution has helped out organization by allowing us to ingest data from various sources to monitor log metrics and enabling alert mechanisms to notify teams if something goes wrong.

Datadog agents act as an integration to different services, providing easy access and management.

The solution is useful for ingesting data from various sources. This helps to monitor the log metrics of the system. It has alert mechanisms that can be enabled to notify the teams if something goes wrong.

Datadog offers good integration to different services. It provides for easy access and management.

Ingesting data from various sources to monitor the log metrics of the system can always improve so that, if something goes wrong, the right teams are alerted. 

We've used the solution for close to 1.5 years.

We use a SaaS deployment.

We have deep integration with Datadog for observability and monitoring.

We use everything from APM, logs, and RUM to monitor and dashboards for tracking system health. 

We are trying to move from many different solutions for error tracking/observability to a single platform (Datadog).

We are currently in the process of setting up logging in Datadog in order to maintain our logs better. We are looking to create more insights into the real user flows by using real user monitoring (RUM) too.

We use Datadog quite extensively. I primarily work with APM traces and logs to debug issues and unblock myself in my day-to-day role. I have found the traces and spans most useful in providing details about why certain services are performing poorly.

Datadog provides a lot of value in terms of adding monitoring and observability to our app. There are so many different solutions, it is sometimes difficult to gauge where to start, and I sometimes miss a lot of functionality (such as the very useful error-tracking dashboard mentioned in my review above).

As I mentioned above, we use Datadog quite extensively. In my day-to-day role, I primarily work with APM traces and logs to debug issues and unblock myself. 

I have found the traces and spans most useful in providing details about why certain services are performing poorly.

Additionally, the flexibility to create notebooks and dashboards and fully customize them gives us a lot of power to track the exact services and endpoints we are working on.

Furthermore, we are also using monitoring to page us if things break, and the Slack integration provides us instantaneous feedback on how things are performing.

We need more visibility into the error tracking dashboard. I only learned about it during a demo at Dash Con. That said, it seems to be a very useful tool.

Additionally, we want to export our dashboards and monitors to source control, and there doesn't seem to be any easy way to do so.

I've used the solution for four years.

For logging, we are moving from LogDNA to Datadog to have access to everything in one place. Also, searching and traversing through logs seems easier in Datadog

I did not evaluate others, however, my team probably did.

Datadog provides a lot of value in terms of adding monitoring and observability to our app. There are so many different solutions; it is sometimes difficult to gauge where to start, and I sometimes miss a lot of functionality. For example, the very useful error-tracking dashboard that I just discovered.