New Relic Reviews

We’re able to see real-time sessions come through. We talk directly to customers as they’re having issues with the site, and we can pull up their email addresses and see what issues they have. For customer support and engineering, it’s crucial.

We’re able to deploy very quickly, not concerning ourselves with every single issue. In production we can address every issue.

There may be issues with scalability with individual users sending events up to the cloud.

Also, it’s a little sluggish getting down to the last dirty details of a session. It’s tough to do, admittedly, but that’s what I’d wish for.

It’s very, very reliable, no issues, and most importantly we haven’t lost any data and we’ve been able to hotlink particular events. All our documentation about particular events, we can always go back and see, which is good for training.

There have been issues, but I do wonder whether we’ll have to tailor the user experience and whether we’ll reach bottlenecks with individual clients sending events up to the cloud.

I've never had to use technical support.

Very straightforward. I don’t recall how it went, that’s how easy it was.

Just install it. It provides so much more than alerting of errors.

Stack traces are the most valuable feature for us. We have a monolithic stack and just having a single place to get product track traces is incredibly valuable. We use all the charts and graphs, but it all comes down to getting stack traces to see how code is flowing.

We’re able to address events immediately. We have very good uptime and customer retention. So it’s all about giving them the best customer experience. It gives us a good digest of how the system is behaving and being able to diagnose any issues.

I’m into very dense charts, and I think the charts used throughout APM are a little low resolution in terms of time points across the X axis. I'd like more granularity.

Used to be fairly slow, but it’s gotten a lot faster. It's industry-leading, the most responsive full suite of tools that I’ve used.

We’ve been able to brainlessly scale.

We've never had to use it.

We set it up through Heroku.

Install it. Doesn’t take up any extra resources or any time to install.

It gives us insight into several areas--

• Where slowdowns are,
• Which of our customers is hitting us most, and
• If there’s an application issue on the database side, how long a query takes.

It gives us enough knowledge to know where to improve things on the database side, or to make improvements in the application logic.

I don't have any suggestions for improvements, but we think sometimes it’s too difficult to get more details about a problem. Sometimes it requires too much drilling down to find out about a problem for which we shouldn't need to do so much searching.

No problems whatsoever with deploying APM.

It seems pretty stable, although there are times when it is not available.

Seems to be pretty good on scalability and it’s easy to install into our applications.

We haven’t had any issues needing to involve their technical support.

It was already in the environment when I joined, but I can't imagine that setup would have been anything but straightforward.

The most valuable feature for us is the ability to see what is going on with the apps on our web server. We can monitor the response times, throughput, what transactions are fast or slow, and what's being hit more than others.

In the past, we had to look at server metrics such as CPU and the number of connections. With APM, we can see much more about what it's doing. It's helped with a lot of troubleshooting of performance issues. It's also helped with code problems, where we deploy something and it's performing slowly. It helps us see the problem in the web app, database, rendering, etc.

We've had no issues with deployment.

We encountered no issues with instability.

It scaled well, as we just need to add a new agent onto the box when we add a server. Also, it's been helpful in determining when we need to scale up by looking at the metrics.

The most valuable features for us are--

• Real-time monitoring
• The interface
• The look and feel
• We can check the environment periodically throughout the day
• Good forensics tool if there's an issue

We can monitor response times, volume, and Apdex. Our alerting is based on Apdex. It's a great sanity check. It's helped us to find problems early and to make sure that what we're doing is working.

I'm on a small team and have an interaction with the Ops teams only when a negative happens, but I've used it a couple of times to pass problems from my plate to someone else's as I've proved it's not my problem.

It doesn't give us rich process tracing, which is the only complaint I have. It divides our system into four parts, and I would like it to go deeper into the code. However, this can be a challenge because of the way it is configured with us, but they are working on it.

It's fantastic, with no bugs or lag.

It scales, and I can't speak about this, but we are moving everything to AWS and it should be fine.

I've never needed them, and the one issue I had, our Ops guys told me what to do.

I would just advise you to use the tool.

It was already in place when I joined.

The most valuable features to us are--

• Measuring performance from the applications point view against the view of the customer's browser,
• Being able to troubleshoot issues due to an app or network issue, and
• The error rate is helpful in finding issues in the server pool.

It helps us troubleshoot issues quicker, and when we're using it for performance analysis, several items can boil to the top. We can look at what's going on and what's slow and causing problems, instead of looking in general at which queries or operations are causing slowness.

I can't think of much to improve. We're very used to the way it looks and the traces. It's much better than it used to be, but perhaps the retention on some of the old problem traces would be an improvement. I think they run out after a relatively short amount of time and being able to look back and spot check some of them. If we have a problem today, it would be nice to look at back at the traces by, say, a week or a month even if there wasn't a problem then, so we can compare whether it's relatively slow or it suddenly become slow.

But I think the data layout is great as everything you need is at the top and we can able to drill down further and further to individual server,s or into the error rate and individual transactions.

The code is great. We don't have any issues, and I think that's the majority of New Relic customers. You have issues with your first customers, fix the issues, and then leave it alone until the next issue comes along.

Our track record is the same, we used it, troubleshot it, and then the developers fixed it.

I think we're finding more and more ways to use it. Because of plug-ins, we are pushing as much information in front of the app to the developers. I think too many companies end up with too many tools, but with New Relic, we want to keep in front of our developers all the time.

We've had to contact tech support several times, and each time they've been great. Their one-time survey call is good.

We've been using AppDynamics alongside New Relic. We had issues finding some problems, so we brought in AppDynamics and were able to dive further in, but after about six months, New Relic traces we're exactly as in-depth and usable. We were pretty confident with New Relic, and brought AppDynamics in to dive deeper, but their interface was Flash, which was slow and not nice.

Everything else about New Relic was nice. We could put different pieces of data in front of the developers, which is nice. They don't have as much information as we do in Ops from our other tools, but they get just the right amount of information to see where the bottlenecks are.

It was quick and simple. Always, whenever we look at a product, including ours, we've got in the back of our heads, what's the mean time to pretty graph? How quick is it to get data in front of you and that's usable? Within minutes we were able to get the information, and the first hour was great with New Relic.

When we're looking at new products, we look at whether the product works, how it works. Doing tests that are long enough is hard as no one wants to spend the time doing it, so I try to make sure that it won't take more than 14 days to set up correctly. If it's important enough, then the trials will be done.

It is one of the things that helps DevOps work in our organization and has helped stop finger pointing. It gives both sides enough info to help point us in the right direction of finding where an issue is. It gives us the insight into production to developers that operations doesn't want developers to have, and it allows them to use it all the time.

The overview itself provides us clear visibility of how applications are doing, and provides us our response times, data rates, and Apdex score.

We’re able to see how deployments are affecting the application, both good and bad. APM surely shows us the change in behavior. It lets us know how our application is doing. A lot of our information comes from trouble tickets, and we can correlate back to APM to see what’s going. It’s not so accurate, but it has to do with the data integration, but New Relic has said that it’ll give more data points and real-time data.

We always talk about, what is the data missing from New Relic? It constantly aggregates data so it’s not a true indication of how our application is doing. It’s not real-time. That was my concern, but after data presented by their CEO at Futurestack, they announced that they recognize the issue and are looking into solving it.

For New Relic in general, the mobile site doesn’t have single sign-on for iOS.

I haven’t noticed any issues. There may have been a couple of instances two years ago when New Relic stopped reporting data, but nothing that I know of since then.

We are using APM to use capacity planning, and the info we get has been able to help us.

We had an issue two years ago, and they were responsive and solved the issue.

I wasn't involved in the setup.

It loses points because our applications are running on Ruby on Rails, and our tech stack is not up to date, so there are some glitches integrating with APM. I'd like to see a fix for that.

Other than that, just go for it, you won’t regret it.

I've found the most valuable feature to be--

• Being able to drill down to see data, and
• Being able to capture all the timing information and different functions.

It comes in as part of the regular process for every application roll-out. We have a standard visibility process for any application that rolls out. It gives us the ability to train our people and provide a more responsive application. We used to have many tools with many different functions, and now APM allows us to consolidate a lot of it.

The mapping between applications to servers is not very intuitive.

Another thing we come across is that our technology just doesn’t have reporting to New Relic, but that can be addressed with a plugin/SDK. However, we can’t really make the case to put in the investment to have that happen yet.

Another thing is that we’re micro-service based, and the New Relic interface only gives us views into the top 100 services out of 50,000. Typically when we monitor our system, we use a heat map, and New Relic only provides us the second-level view of that. Ideally, it would also provide us the first-level view. Eventually, we’d like New Relic to step up to do that.

Finally, it should ideally do two things -

1. Isolate the problem right away without the user having to do a lot of analysis. Right now, New Relic provides a lot of data points that require me to go in to understand.
2. It has its own dashboard, and I’d like to be able to bring that/integrate it into our own system (use an API to pull out data).

Sometimes when we pull data from New Relic, we time-out or drop data, and we can see when that happens, but we're not sure if it’s us or them.

Also, the alerting system has trouble with large alerts that come up slowly, requiring the operator to know the system well (yellow, red, orange) and to know what the alerts mean.

It hasn’t scaled quite right now. We use another tool for out-of-gate view. Currently, we manage about 60,000 servers in total and we don’t have a good roll-up view of the entire system. The application on the server side is OK. We use other tools to monitor the environment.

So far, the interactions have been good, and they keep us in the loop as to what’s been done. In terms of the solution, it’s just OK.

I wasn't involved in the setup.

Engage the development community within the company early, and request an integration tool to make implementation easy.