Datadog Reviews

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.

Our primary use case is log management and we also use the solution for monitoring the application and underlying infrastructure. I'm an IT test manager. 

I appreciate that they are constantly adding new features, some of which we haven't yet had a chance to implement. 

I'd like to see more flexibility in the customization and they have a few settings which need to be changed but we are unable to make those changes as users or as the administrator. The tagging to get the different parts of the monitoring interconnected is a bit tricky and takes time to work out. 

I've been using this solution for 18 months. 

The stability is good. 

I would say that the amount that we are monitoring is not that large and we've never had any scalability issues. We have around 50 users in our department. 

The availability or accessibility to customer service is not always good, although they generally provide solutions once you do manage to get hold of them. 

We have previously used different tools for different parts of the monitoring. We changed to AWS when we moved to the cloud. We also found that the effort in maintaining Grafana and Prometheus and keeping it up to date was taking too much time.

The initial setup was straightforward, we used a service provider and they also maintain our operation in general.

We have a four-year contract with Datadog, and the solution is pay-as-you-use. 

I would suggest using the documentation, which is quite good. It's best to start with existing integrations, and then do the customization step-by-step.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

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.

Datadog is expensive. 

The tool's deployment is easy. 

The solution's pricing depends on project volume. 

I rate Datadog a seven out of ten. 

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 primarily use the solution for logging and APM, and for real user metrics.

The solution has helped out organization gain improved visibility.

The most useful aspects of the solution include RUM, session replay, and APM.

The product needs a better Datadog agent installation.

I've used the solution for one year.

We previously used App Dynamics.

Before choosing Datadog, we looked at Splunk.

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.