Amazon CloudWatch Reviews

I use it for log monitoring and log capture. That's the main purpose. 

Alerts and notifications functions help with the operational response. For example, if you have a critical server and want to set an alert if CPU utilization exceeds 90%, a notification will be raised. You can link an action to that notification, not just notify. 

You can automate actions or use AWS functionalities like auto-scaling, where you can configure the metrics to add more nodes if the threshold is exceeded. AWS has become very rich in functionality over time, and the same piece of functionality can solve different problems.

CloudWatch automation works through notifications linked to Lambda functions, which can then perform any automation you like.

CloudWatch has many things. It gives you metrics and logs. You can set up alerts and notifications for the metrics and do a lot of automation once you have the notifications. 

You can also create dashboards, although it's an additional fee that AWS charges. We can create a different dashboard with Grafana kind of thing. 

The use cases are different for different people, but three things everyone uses are: 

• Metrics monitoring
• Log monitoring, and 
• Alerting and notification.

CloudWatch is extremely helpful for automation and other things for experienced users, but it's not very intuitive. It doesn't have drag-and-drop functionality to trigger actions from notifications. It's very capable, but it requires expert knowledge to leverage that capability.

So, for new or basic users, it's a bit complex to understand how it works. Basic users can see what is happening in the console, but building automation and other things requires expert knowledge.

Improvement in log patterns and metrics: 

There are a lot of things. For example, there are log patterns and metric patterns. But if you have to do anomaly detection, I think the latest version added that, but they didn't have it before. Users can build it; Users can stream the log, build log analytics, and do anomaly detection, but it is not very straightforward. It's a very powerful tool, but you need expert knowledge to do those things.

Region-specific service puts certain limits:

Also, CloudWatch is a very region-specific service. People struggle with that, for example, if you have an application distributed in different geographies like Europe, India, and the USA. There is no way to aggregate CloudWatch logs in one place for workloads in every region. You need a third-party tool to get a holistic view of your application. CloudWatch has the data, but you need advanced skills to aggregate it and create insights.

Suggestions for additional functionality for CloudWatch: 

Cloudwatch needs better built-in analytics capability. CloudWatch has a lot of data, but it's difficult to gain insights unless you stream it to a third-party log analytics tool. If there were built-in capabilities to analyze the data, that would be great.

I have been using Amazon CloudWatch for ten years. We do work on a lot of AWS services, like CloudWatch, SageMaker, and even their generative AI solution like Bedrock.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. There are no issues with stability. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

There are around 50 end users, and all the ops people use CloudWatch.

AWS provides multiple support levels, including basic, business, and enterprise support. Your experience can differ depending on your support level.

My company uses business support. Quality-wise, it's okay most of the time, but sometimes, you get people with less experience. Response time could be improved because, for production applications, you want immediate support. Sometimes, it can take up to an hour to get someone on chat support.

Azure also has something like CloudWatch. All cloud vendors have something similar.

The initial setup is very simple. 

CloudWatch also has an API, so I can send logs to CloudWatch by calling the API. But natively, it only integrates with AWS services.

Integration capabilities: 

AWS has built different frameworks, like the simple notification service (SNS). From AWS SNS, I can fire Lambda or integrate with the event bus, AWS EventBridge. From an integration point of view among the peers, AWS is probably one of the best that offers you the integration capability.

I would rate the pricing in the middle. It is a five out of ten, with one being high price, and ten being low price. 

Everyone needs it. There is no other way to capture central logs, so it's for everyone, irrespective of the size of the company.

I would recommend it. Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution for monitoring CPU usage, memory usage, Lambda logs, and load balancer logs.

The monitoring features are valuable. The product pushes notifications with the help of SNS. We can increase or decrease our instances horizontally or vertically. We are collecting CloudWatch logs in Grafana too. We have also configured it with Kibana.

CloudWatch doesn’t monitor disk throughput by default. It is part of EC2. If EC2 forwards the logs, then we can do it.

I have been using the solution for three years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

The tool’s scalability is good. I rate the scalability a seven and a half out of ten. I have configured two instances for CPU usage. It breaks the threshold. It scales up and down multiple times. It is better to build only one instance in such facilities. We have 30 users in our organization.

The support is good.

Positive

The initial setup is easy. The deployment takes around five minutes. It is very fast.

The pricing is average.

We were using third-party tools before. We had to configure the third-party tools.

I will recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

CloudWatch is important because we use it to remediate automation. For example, I had to integrate GuardDuty with CloudWatch. If anything went wrong in the environment when GuardDuty had captured all the APIs, and if someone got an alarm on the server, it was basically because of CloudWatch. CloudWatch would have seen an intruder, thinking, "This is what's happening," and so on.

I used the solution to monitor, collect, and store metrics from AWS solutions like EC2. Taking all these metrics from other sections, such as GuardDuty for the security department and all the security hubs, you are presented with all the views at once.

CloudWatch is required for the organization to stay compliant.

The detection is the most valuable feature.

CloudWatch's scalability could be improved.

I've been using CloudWatch for almost five years.

I rate CloudWatch's stability a seven out of ten.

I rate CloudWatch's scalability a seven out of ten.

The solution was easy to deploy.

The price is okay for me. How good the pricing is depends on how you want to use the solution.

CloudWatch has good features and tools. No matter how many people are on the security team, CloudWatch monitors the performance of your gateway resources daily, including CPU utilization and network traffic. If you are new to monitoring, CloudWatch is good because it helps you monitor your environment and your logs and captures and generates logs by applications and resources. I rate CloudWatch an eight out of ten.

It's a monitoring tool. If we want to monitor any of the applications hosted in AWS, we can see the logs and the artifacts of those applications in CloudWatch.

If we deploy anything and get into some issues, it would be pretty difficult to understand it. So, we go through the CloudWatch logs of the application to understand why we are getting the error. It helps us to resolve the issues.

The product can be integrated with AWS very easily. Most of the services are in-built. We just need to have the configurations. We can easily get the logs we need from those services. It gives us the logs of CPU utilization and memory utilization of the applications.

The product’s documentation must be improved. We faced an issue with a service that is integrated with CloudWatch. Whenever there were 50,000 to 60,000 log lines, CloudWatch only showed us 10,000 to 15,000. We could not get all the log lines in the same place. When we tried to get everything together, the product crashed.

I have been using the solution for around two years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The support team is good.

Positive

It’s an open-source solution.

It's an AWS service. We just have to integrate it into our application, and we'll be able to see the values and logs on the server. If an organization is using AWS, only then they should use CloudWatch. It is already integrated into AWS. Just a few clicks will show the logs and data that we need. Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We use the solution to monitor the devices on our system or infrastructure. CloudWatch notifies you when a token is used or when the VM is not working. It helps you to determine the status of your infrastructure.

We created a CloudWatch application or feature for our system to provide us with the ongoing status of our machines or components in the network.

Scheduling is a valuable feature.

When you set up CloudWatch, you can't even take a lot without checking on them or without going through the whole configuration because we're configuring. It's not a frequent feature you always work on.

The integration requires a lot of permissions and the tool delays in providing notifications. Sometimes, receiving a notification after an update takes a long time. So, we prefer using a monitoring tool like New Relic or Grafana.

Another area of improvement is scheduling. CloudWatch is complicated when it comes to scheduling. If you want to monitor the component, the configuration is not straightforward. You need good knowledge for something to be added there.

I have been using Amazon CloudWatch for two years. We use the latest version of CloudWatch.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

It is hard to configure; it is not a straightforward tool.

We see an ROI. 

The price is okay. 

If someone wants to use the product. It depends on whether the company can use another tool. If so, I recommend AWS, which, too, has a monitoring tool. However, it may still be too expensive for a small company. I recommend using CloudWatch for a small company if they don’t have money.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use Amazon CloudWatch for monitoring applications. We use it for Synthetics and also RAM. Amazon CloudWatch has been very helpful for monitoring our applications. We have been able to create a monitoring account where we get metrics, traces, and application monitoring data in one account. One noteworthy feature is that this is free of cost.

Amazon CloudWatch has been very helpful for monitoring our applications. We have been able to create a monitoring account where we get metrics, traces, and application monitoring data in one account. One noteworthy feature is that this is free of cost.

The most valuable part is the metrics part, which is really good. They recently introduced Application Signals, which we like the most. Additionally, the Synthetics feature is something that we love.

There is some delay in logging that they need to improve on. While CloudWatch is good, when compared to Dynatrace, there are several areas for improvement. For instance, Dynatrace has better distributed tracing and a feature like back trace, which CloudWatch lacks. In terms of alerts, we use PagerDuty, but composite alarms and similar features need more work.

I would say I have almost three years of experience with Amazon CloudWatch.

Amazon CloudWatch is stable. However, there is some delay in logging that needs improvement.

It is pretty scalable. We have not had any problems so far.

Amazon's customer service is very good. They are both responsive and knowledgeable. Depending on the ticket, they connect us with the right resource without having us jump through different channels.

Positive

Previously, we used Dynatrace, which is an APM tool. We recently moved to CloudWatch but still use Dynatrace.

The initial setup of Amazon CloudWatch is very simple. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the ease of setup between nine and ten.

Multiple squads and teams, approximately 200 different teams, have been using Amazon CloudWatch.

Return on this investment is still to be discovered. Currently, we are in the middle of migration, paying for both on-prem and CloudWatch, as well as Dynatrace and CloudWatch. Once everything is settled in the cloud, we will have a clearer picture.

In general, Amazon CloudWatch is cheaper compared to Dynatrace. However, there are potential costs to be mindful of, like running a log query that returns trillions of bytes of data.

I have experience with Dynatrace. Comparing CloudWatch against Dynatrace highlights many areas for improvement.

I would definitely recommend CloudWatch if your applications are running in AWS. If your applications are in a different environment or cloud, I am not sure I would recommend it.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

Amazon CloudWatch is a monitoring and availability service designed to collect and check metrics and collect and monitor log files. We can set alarms, and Amazon CloudWatch allows users to gain operational insight into their application resource and services. The solution also helps users to ensure the reliability, performance, and availability of their infrastructure.

The most valuable features of Amazon CloudWatch are metrics, dashboards, alarms, logs, events, logs insight, and application insights.

The solution should provide human-readable metrics. Amazon CloudWatch should add custom metrics, like static metrics or any data relevant to our use case.

I have been using Amazon CloudWatch for more than three years.

More than five people are using Amazon CloudWatch in our organization.

The solution’s technical support is good.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

Amazon CloudWatch is a cheap solution.

We don't need to update or do any maintenance on Amazon CloudWatch. The solution has more features available, like metrics. Amazon CloudWatch provides a wide range of metrics for AWS resources, including EC2 and all AWS services. Users can create a custom dashboard to visualize and monitor metrics from various AWS services on a single screen on the dashboard.

This helps in checking the health and performance of the application and resources. Amazon CloudWatch logs allow users to monitor and install log files from the application. The solution's alarms allow users to set thresholds on metrics.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

It serves as a diagnostic and profiling tool, particularly useful for dissecting the intricacies of applications, especially in scenarios like Microsoft's best applications. When a user triggers transactions through the GUI, such as purchasing tickets for events like cricket or concerts, the process involves multiple layers—starting from the front-end GUI to the back-end middle tier, microservices, and concluding with database interactions. It allows me to meticulously analyze and monitor these processes by creating and examining various logs. I can delve into the details of each stage, from API calls to network components, and server processing (involving Java Virtual Machine), and even gauge how long specific APIs or queries take to execute. This tool proves invaluable in identifying bottlenecks, such as waiting times or timeouts and understanding the performance of APIs, queries, and even the efficiency of gateways.

When working with AWS services like Lambda functions and AWS Step Functions, it facilitates the creation of insightful dashboards. These dashboards offer a comprehensive view of Lambda function performance, allowing me to gauge capacity utilization and identify areas requiring optimization. In recent experiences, its profiling capabilities have been instrumental in creating detailed dashboards for monitoring.

It is a robust analytical tool and it goes beyond mere functionality and extends into the realm of providing comprehensive insights. It empowers me with analytical skills and capabilities, offering a detailed snapshot of the entire process of requests within an application. Its strength lies in its ability to paint a vivid picture of the application's performance by breaking down the journey of each request, revealing which components are causing delays, and identifying specific pain points.

There is a need for seamless integration with databases, whether they are open-source or proprietary like InfluxDB. Incorporating a straightforward method or a plug-and-play solution for integrating these databases with our systems, facilitating smooth data transfer, and enabling the creation of dashboards for monitoring and analysis would be beneficial.

Over the past six to seven months, I've been actively using it for one of our ongoing projects, but my broader experience extends over two to three years, particularly in migration projects from on-premises to cloud-based solutions.

I find it remarkably stable. Its effectiveness in helping me discern patterns, understand the behavior of components, requests, queries, or even aspects related to application performance is noteworthy.

Approximately forty to fifty individuals within the current organization use it actively.

When issues arise or specific requirements demand assistance, the process of reaching out to support can be somewhat cumbersome. Resolving concerns involve navigating through channels, creating or accessing accounts, and then connecting with support.

While I have some hands-on involvement, the extent of my practical experience has been limited as the detailed implementation is usually managed by specialized teams.

The pricing can be considered reasonable, especially when already operating on a cloud platform. The cost is justifiable given the expertise it offers and its capabilities in addressing challenges associated with cloud environments.

Leveraging CloudWatch is advantageous due to its seamless integration with cloud services, making it a valuable asset for monitoring and gaining insights into the platform's performance. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.