It helps us organize the data from our clients and reason with it. Moreover, with the client JS API, we can report data to New Relic and query it with Insights. It is easy to use and has an understandable graph editor.
This is the real deal.
It helps us organize the data from our clients and reason with it. Moreover, with the client JS API, we can report data to New Relic and query it with Insights. It is easy to use and has an understandable graph editor.
This is the real deal.
Tracking and monitoring production is mandatory, however, we did it for years only for the back-end side. As the client-side applications grow bigger and get more complex more responsibility gets to the client. Because of that we must be able to understand if our clients are "healthy". The term "healthy" is not clear to what it means.
Presently we report data to New Relic Insights, and we've built some really readable and understandable graphs. We monitor with those graphs every deploy to production, and we are advising the graphs to resolve current problems with our application, like errors and problems with the load and response times.
New Relic comes with some features out of the box, but not enough. There are some essential features that New Relic needs to implement that their competitors already support, like special treatment for AngularJS/React applications. We had to implement (with the JS API) the ability to query errors through Insights which is essential. Currently, we don't have a way to send alerts which is a real pain.
We are using it in conjunction with APM and Insights.
We've had no issues with deployment.
We've had no issues with stability.
We've had no issues with scalability.
We also looked at Raygun.io and TrackJs which are great products, but neither has the tri-factor, which is:
New Relic has a good separation between the data that you report and how you show it, along with data you get out of the box. My advice is about how to show the data in a way that it will be easy to reason with it.
You can build many different graphs, really try them all, and then decide what fits best for your organization. That's what we did. The way you handle data varies between organizations and even between teams in a organization, and the ability to show the data in different ways is very helpful with that.
New Relic always gets new things done. The system is always changing and in a good way. New features are always coming into the system and we are very happy with it.
It shows you what’s going on, but we had to do custom instrumentation ourselves.
Never needed it.
The decision was why not to have it (cost?) not why to have it.
New Relic is great for DevOps and for a company that expects developers to do their own operations. For specialists they tend to have their own instrumentation tools.
It gives us insight into several areas--
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.
Real-time error monitoring means I can drill down and see what’s happening. It allows me to see what my latency is while it’s going on.
The data visualization is easy to read. Better yet, it's easy to show other people the visualizations.
I'd like second-by-second monitoring, instead of a five-minute lag time.
It's good, though there was just one instance where the agent had a problem, but it was quick to remedy.
No issues encountered with scalability.
I found a bug and they gave us a work around, and a week later, they released a patch.
I wasn't involved in the initial setup.
I would like to see the platform extended further.
Dashboards let us monitor applications. We can see exactly what the problem is and where we need to go to troubleshoot it to solve the problem. Most of the time it tells us what the problem is. When you see it up in the application you put it exactly where you need it; we can troubleshoot simply by looking.
If something goes bad, we can resolve it faster and in the proper way, rather than spending a lot of time just trying to understand what’s going on. We can see easily what’s working and not, so there’s less downtime.
It’s really powerful with a lot of features, but some training and documentation from New Relic would be useful.
We had some problems at the beginning, but we may not have set it up properly. It’s not clear if it was stability problem in New Relic or in our application, and it was just at the beginning.
Our stack is fixed, so we only scale within the set number of servers.
I wasn’t on the implementation team.
Sometimes we just don’t know how to maximize the use of its features. If we had some additional training, that would help.
Ease of installation/maintenance.
Makes it a lot easier to troubleshoot application issues.
1.5 years.
We use a deployment solution so after we set it up once we could package up the deployment and go from there. Administratively, it's really easy since it's an SaaS application.
Haven't encountered as issues with stability.
Haven't encountered as issues with scalability.
Excellent.
Technical Support:Excellent.
I had not used another solution. Others in the company have. Switch was due to feature set, ease of use, and less administrative overhead.
I had to read the instruction page but other than that, it's easy.
We did not implement through a vendor.
I do not know. The licenses were purchased and I installed Java and server agents.
I was not involved in the choice/purchase of this product.
Have your dev team read the information about the product: it's capabilities and how to implement them. That will help a lot in the long run.
Drew - have you tried AppInternals? It offers user-to-backend transaction tracing and second-by-second performance monitoring. Try it for free here: www.appinternals.com