Datadog Reviews

We're in the process of doing a Proof of Concept with the solution right now.

One of the solution's greatest aspects is its overall simplicity. It is very easy to use. It's easier to handle than other brands we have access to.

The monitoring capabilities that the solution provides are very good.

We find they have a very helpful alert system.

The product has been very stable. We've liked the performance provided.

The initial setup is simple and easy to handle. It's not hard at all.

The experience we've had with technical support has been very positive so far. They are helpful.

The integration capabilities have been pretty good overall. We have no complaints.

We haven't used the solution too much yet to assess what features it is missing or would improve. The support in Latin American is a point that would mark as a point to improve

The stability of the solution is excellent. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable in terms of performance.

Technical support has been helpful overall. They are knowledgeable and responsive. We are quite satisfied with the level of service they provide to our company. 

We are actually still using actually Elasticsearch and Kibana, however, we prefer to use Datadog due to the fact that it is very simple. We really enjoy how it operates

We found the initial setup to not be overly complex. It's rather straightforward and easy to execute. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process.

I'm not sure if the license is expensive or cheap. It's managed by the customer and we've recently come on board.

I am an end-user and customer. I don't have any business relationship with the product itself. We work with clients on the infrastructure and IT developer infrastructure mostly. We work with a variety of solutions, including Dynatrace, Datadog, Elasticsearch, etcetera.

In general, due to its simplicity and ease of use, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very satisfied with the solution overall.

We primarily use Datadog for logs, APM, infrastructure monitoring, and lambda visibility.

We have built a number of critical dashboards that we display within our office for engineers to have a good understanding of the application performance, as well as business partners to understand at a high level the traffic flowing through the app.

We started with logging, as our primary monitor, and have shifted to APM to get a deeper understanding of what our system is doing, and how the changes we are making impact the apps.

Datadog has given us near-live visibility across our entire cloud platform. We are finally in a state where we are alerting our users about degraded performance well before the helpdesk tickets start rolling in.

We are making major architectural decisions based on the data we are getting from Datadog. It also gives us an idea of where the complexity really lies in some older, monolithic apps. 

We have used the APM endpoint monitoring to prioritize work on slower endpoints because we can see the total count, as well as the latency. That has been a big driver in our refactor work prioritization.

We have struggled to get more business-centric measures in our code to surface actual business values in our reports, but that is our next initiative.

We started with Log analytics in the beginning stages of our monitoring journey. Those were very insightful, but obviously only as useful as we made them with good logging practices.

The dashboards we created are core indicators of the health of our system, and it is one of the most reliable sources we have turned to, especially as we have seen APM metrics impacted several times lately. We can usually rely on logs to tell us what the apps are doing.

APM and Traces have been crucial to understanding how users are actually using the app. That drives a lot of our decisions around refactoring and focusing our limited engineering resources.

Continued improvement around cost and pricing model is needed. It is pretty complex and takes a fair amount of intimate knowledge to know exactly how turning on a single function is going to impact your bill, especially when you don't see the metrics for a day or two. 

We have recently had a number of issues with stability and delays on logging, monitoring, metric evaluation, and alerts. More often than not in the past month, it seems that we get the banner across the to of our dashboards that some service is impacted. They don't always show up on the incident page, either.

We have been using Datadog for two years.

Overall, it has been fairly stable for us. There are the occasional issues with importing data, that has usually been resolved in a short time. We have never had an issue where that data was lost, just delayed, and eventually backfilled. 

It seems (anecdotally, of course) that there have been a few more stability issues lately. We have noticed several days that we are getting in-app alert banners indicating that some metric or log ingestion was delayed, or the web app itself was experiencing severe slowness. 

Overall, these issues are resolved rather quickly - kudos to their engineering teams. I hear that they actually use Datadog to monitor Datadog. 

Datadog is very scalable but just watch the cost.

Technical support is hit and miss; there are a number of nuances to how this tool should be implemented, and it is difficult to re-explain how our infrastructure and applications are set up every time we need an in-depth investigation to understand what is broken.

Previously, we used AppDynamics. The pricing model didn't seem to fit with actual cloud spend. Now we may have swung the pendulum a little too far, and seem to be dealing with pricing on every facet of the application. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. Additional tweaks and configuration have been a bit more difficult as we get deeper and deeper into the guts of the integrations. Making sure we are keeping up with a rapid release schedule, and keeping our server clients in sync with our app packages has been troublesome. There have been some major changes in the APM that have introduced a number of bugs and broken some of our dashboards and alerts.

Our in-house team handled the deployment, with a lot of tickets created for the Datadog team.

ROI is difficult to measure completely. Our first year spend compared to our second and now going into the third year spend have been significantly different.

My advice is to really keep an eye on your overage costs, as they can spiral really fast. We turned on some additional span measures and didn't realize until it was too late that it had generated a ton.

Frankly, we love the visibility it gives us into our applications, but it is a bit cumbersome to ensure we are paying for the right stuff. Overall, the cost is worth it, as it helps us keep system-critical applications up and running, and reduces our detection and correction times significantly.

We evaluated Dynatrace and AppD before choosing this product.

Datadog requires pretty close supervision on the usage page to ensure you aren't going out of control. They have provided a bunch of new features to assist in retention percentage, but it can be a bit confusing on what is being retained, and what can be viewed again after triggering an alert. It's a difficult balance of making sure you are getting the right data for alerts, and still having the correct information still available for research after the fact.

We primarily use DataDog for performance and log monitoring of cloud environments, which include VMs and Azure Services like Azure compute, storage, network, firewall, and app services via event hubs.  

Alerting based on monitors via teams and PagerDuty. 

Logs collection for Azure services like Azure database, Azure Application Gateway, Azure AKS, and other Azure services.

Custom metrics using a Python script to collect metrics for components not natively supported by Datadog.

Synthetic testing to ensure uptime and browser tests via CI/CD pipeline.

Datadog has improved our visibility into infrastructure topology and performance. It provided a simplified view and ability to drill down to system performance, process usage, and logs.

We were able to set up monitors for infrastructure and applications, as the metrics were readily available in the platform. Fine-tuning monitors is very easy and the ability to configure monitor alerts with details on how to resolve the alert is a key value add. 

Integration with PagerDuty, teams ensure timely alerting. PagerDuty integration bring tags from Datadog to PagerDuty, which is very useful in routing incidents to the right service

The Host Map, Live Process provides performance metrics of our application. The support team likes using Datadog for identifying resources affected and obtaining the logs. 

Monitors are easy and quick to setup. Metrics are easily accessible and quick to use. The ability to send notifications based on metadata from the monitor is helpful. The setup for monitors is one time and it works for all workloads, whether it is Azure or any other cloud.

Logs rehydration helps us archive and rehydrate logs as we need. We don't need logs to be indexed at all times. Logs are required only for escalations and rehydrating does the job and provides cost savings.

We need the ability to create a service dependency map like Splunk ITSI. We have to build this in PagerDuty and it's not the best user experience. The ability to create custom inventory objects based on logs ingested would be a value add. It would be better if Datadog makes this a simple click and enable.

It would be helpful to have the ability to upgrade agents via the Datadog portal. Once agents are connected to the Datadog portal, we should be able to upgrade them quickly.

Security monitoring for Azure and Operating System (Windows and Linux) are features that need to be addressed.

Dashboards for Azure Active Directory metrics and events should be improved.

We have been using Datadog for more than six months.

Stability-wise, it has been good.

The scalability is good so far. 

Support team has been very responsive. Only complain is on issues they don't understand, they should have a quick call and unblock the customer.

We didn't have a solution in place. The only thing we had were logs.

Setup is hassle-free and pretty straightforward. 

I deployed it myself.

No returns yet. We are in growth mode. If this becomes expensive we may have to look at alternative options.

The cost is high and this can be justified if the scale of the environment is big.

Datadog needs to provide better pricing for large customers.

Prior to implementing Datadog, we evaluated Splunk.

Overall, the Datadog product is really good.

It doesn't need a sales team and yet, the sales team has screwed up on some occasions. It's a great product and the customer success needs to put an extra effort to help customers with best practices rather than passing them off to support.

Customer success doesn't evangelize product features and the customer doesn't know what new is coming unless they ask about it.

We were in need of a cloud monitoring tool that was operationally focused on the AWS Platform. We wanted to be able to responsibly and effectively monitor, troubleshoot, and operate the AWS platform, including Server, Network, and key AWS Services.

Tooling that highlighted and detected problems, anomalies, and provided best practice recommendations. Tooling that expedites root-cause analysis and performance troubleshooting.

Datadog provided us the ability to monitor our cloud infrastructure (network, servers, storage), platform/middleware (database, web/applications servers, business process automation), and business applications across our cloud providers.

Datadog provided us the tooling to help us effectively monitor, troubleshoot, and operate the AWS platform, including Server, Network, Database, and key AWS Services. It highlights detected problems and anomalies and provides best practice recommendations, expedites root-cause analysis, and performance troubleshooting.

Datadog provides analytics and insights that are actionable through out-of-the-box visualizations, dashboards, aggregation, and intuitive searching that shortens the time to value and account for our limited time & resources we have to operate in production.

The most valuable feature is the dashboards that are provided out of the box, as well as ones we were able to configure. Specific Dashboards that were provided that made things easier were EC2, RDS, Kubernetes dashboards.

We also use the logging tool, which makes searching for specific error logs easier to do.

Datadog Logging provides the capability for us to use AWS logs such as VPC Flow Logs, ELB, EC2, RDS, and other logs that provide lots of relevant operational data but are not actionable. Datadog provides a tool that can provide us analytics and insights that are actionable for visualizations, dashboards, alerting, and intuitive searching.

More pre-configured "Monitor Alerts" would be helpful. Datadog's knowledge of its customers and what they are looking for in terms of monitoring and alerting could be taken advantage of with pre-canned alerts. They have started this with "Recommended Monitors".  That feature was very helpful when configuring our Kubernetes alerts. More would be even better. 

Datadog tech support is very good. One area that could be more helpful is actually talking to someone or sharing your screen to help troubleshoot issues that arise. For new cloud engineers just coming into the cloud monitoring field, there is a learning curve. There is a lot to learn and figure out. For example, we still ran into some issues configuring the private link and more videos of how to do things could be of use.

We have been using Datadog for one year.

We have not run into any issues with stability.

The scalability of Datadog is very good.

Customer service has been excellent.  I communicate weekly a Datadog Customer Success Manager.  He helps me followup on any open issues or questions that we may have.  Technical support has been very good. Opening tickets is easy.  Sometimes a Tech Engineer may take a bit of time to get back with you.  Communicating with Tech Engineer has to be done via ticket/email - no phone assistance is available.

we did not.

Procedures for setup seemed straightforward but once you got going, there were some issues. For us, getting our private link to work needed additional tech support. They were able to help us resolve the issue we were experiencing. I think the procedures could be done a bit better to help you with setup.

We deployed it ourselves.

Datadog helps us minimize downtime and helps us resolve issues quickly.  

Pricing seemed easy until the bill came in and some things were not accounted for. The issue may have been that we didn't realize what was being accounted for, such as the number of servers and the number of logs being ingested.

Datadog had really good pre-sale reps that work with us but need to make sure all the details are covered.

The solution we were looking for needed to provide out-of-the-box capabilities that shorten the time to value. We had limited time & limited resources. Datadog had high recommendations in these areas, so we decided to do a trial with them.

We are very pleased with Datadog overall.

Datadog has assigned an account rep to us that meets with us regularly to make sure all our needs are being met and help us get answers to any questions or issues we are running up against. They have been of great helping us standup monitoring of our Kubernetes environment.

We primarily use this product for availability and performance monitoring, log aggregation.

Datadog gave us awesome visibility across all of our applications.

The most valuable features are logging, the extensive set of integrations, and easy jumpstart.

In the past two years, there have been a couple of outages.

We have been using Datadog for two years.

The outages that we have had in the past two years were fixed in a matter of minutes.

So far we did not have any issues with scaling, and everything is working great.

Support is awesome.

We did use NewRelic, but the logging feature was not as good as it is in Datadog.

The initial setup is straightforward and everything is very well documented and easy to start using.

We implemented it in-house.

We evaluated a custom ELK solution, Sumo Logic, and Logentries.

Datadog is already covering much more than we normally need with exceptional quality. This is a great product.

We primarily use Datadog for the monitoring of EC2 and ECS containers running mostly Rails applications that host a SaaS product. We also monitor ElasticSearch and RDS, and we are working on adding their Application Performance Monitoring solution to monitor our applications directly.

We use DataDog to create dashboards, graphs, and alerts based on interesting metrics. DataDog is our first place to look to find the performance of our system.

We also use their logging platform and it works well. Especially useful is that the logs and metrics are tightly integrated so you can jump between them easily.

Developers are able to see how code is running in production, where this was mostly opaque previous to us implementing DataDog. We are able to emit custom metrics that are specific to our business, and the built-in metrics have also proven useful. Having a wealth of information has helped us investigate outages, and having historical data helps us tune our system.

DevOps engineers are able to put sensors around our system to proactively detect problems, whereas before, our engineers heard about problems from customers. Logs are easier to find for developers.

Metric graphing and Dashboards are the most valuable features because they give us good observability into our system and work well to alert us when interesting things happen. We use this functionality daily.

We value the monitoring capability since it allows us to be pushed alerts, rather than have to observe graphs continually. The integrations with Slack and PagerDuty enable us to be interrupted appropriately and keep a running tab on the system without bothering us unnecessarily.

The online process monitoring has been extremely helpful, as it gives engineers the ability to see the live status of all the processes running our systems without them having to log in.

Their logging solution is expensive for our use case. They do have the capability to rehydrate old or incomplete logs, and it works, but I would rather not have to think about that operation.

Datadog has a lot of documentation, but a lot of that documentation assumes you know how the service works, which can lead to confusion. Positive note is that they do have lots of documentation, it just needs better curation.

Their APM solution still needs some work, but they are actively developing it. I would also like to see more database-specific application monitoring.

I have been using Datadog for five years across two companies.

Any issues are addressed and communicated very quickly. I have not had any issues with uptime.

If you do not need 100% of data such as logs, APM traces, etc., this scales well. It does not scale as well if you want 100% of your logs indexed. You should understand any other usage-based bills before using any part of their service as it is very easy to run up a large bill.

The performance of the system scales very well, and host monitoring and APM are relatively cheap.

Account support is excellent.

Customer support is good if you get them to go beyond pointing out the right documentation.

Previously, I used homebuilt solutions with Nagios and Cacti but found that there was far too much work to understand them and keep them up and fed compared to the value that I got. They also did not integrate well with existing data sources without a lot of effort.

I also previously used StackDriver and found it too opinionated. I like that DataDog gives you tools to work with certain types of data and make your own graphs, monitors, etc., whereas, with StackDriver, I felt like there were a limited number of ways you could accomplish goals.

The basic setup is easy. A more advanced setup can be tricky because the documentation assumes you know how the system works already. Support is somewhat helpful, but mostly points out the documentation you should already have found.

We implemented in-house.

My advice is to understand what number of hosts and data you want to commit to. Beware that usage-based billing is both a blessing and a curse. It is easy to run up a large bill, so become familiar with the cost of each piece of your bill and use the metrics they supply to estimate and monitor your bill.

I have had good luck with their support team helping us to figure out the correct commit levels. Their account support is excellent in this regard. I have heard their sales team can be aggressive, but I have not experienced it personally.

I originally chose Datadog because of my previous experience. We recently considered moving over to New Relic because we liked their APM solution better. However, the pricing of New Relic and our familiarity with Datadog won over. New Relic is a good product but it didn't fit our overall needs as well as Datadog.

Our primary use of Datadog includes: 

• Keeping a close look into our AWS resources. Monitoring our multiple RDS and ElastiCache instances play a big role in our indicators.
• Kubernetes. We aren't using all of the available Kubernetes integrations but the few of them that work out of the box adds great value to our metrics.
• Monitoring and alerting. We wired our most relevant monitoring and alerts to services like PagerDuty, and for the rest of them, we keep our engineers up to date with constant Slack updates. 
  

Observability is something that a lot of Companies are trying to achieve. Having a clear view, not only of our infrastructure but our apps and services as well, has brought a great added value to our customers.

For a logging solution, we use to have Papertrail. It did the trick but having a single point that manages and indexes all the logs is a BIG improvement. Also, having the option to generate metrics from logs is a game-changer that we're trying to include in our monitoring strategy.

I would like to say the same about APM but the support for PHP seems to be somewhat lacking. It works but I think this service could provide us more information.

With respect to logs, we used to integrate various kinds of tools to achieve very basic tasks and it always felt like a very fragile solution. I think logs are by far the most useful feature and at the same time, the one that we could improve.

APM - This is either a hit or miss, allow me to explain: we use various programming languages, mainly PHP and Ruby, and the traces generated don't always provide all of the information we want. For example, we get a great level of detail for the SQL queries that the app generates but not so much for the PHP side. It's hard to track where exactly where all of the bottlenecks are, so some analysis tools for APM could make a good addition.

Please add PHP profiling; you already have it for other popular programming languages such as Python and Java, which is great because we have a little bit of those, but our main app is powered by PHP and we don't have profiling for this yet. I guess it's only a matter of time for this to be added, so in the meanwhile, you can consider this review as a vote for the PHP profiling support.

The pricing model could be simplified as it feels a bit outdated, especially when you look at the billing model of compute instances vs the containers instances.

We have been using Datadog for one year.

It's pretty stable for the main integrations. There was only one time where Datadog was down and that was scary since all of our monitoring is handled by Datadog. There was a lot of uncertainty while the outage was in place.

For everyday use, it's adequate, but for very specific tasks, not so much. There was a time where I had to do a big export and as expected, the API is somewhat limited. Since it was a one-time task, it was not a big deal but if this was a regular task, I wouldn't be happy about it.

For small tasks, I think it's great. For specialized support, it feels like you're under-staffed, having to wait days/weeks for a solution is a big NO-NO.

I've used a few other products such as NewRelic and AppDynamics. The switch is usually affected by two factors: pricing and convenience.

Getting APM metrics out of Kubernetes is always a painful task. We got support to take a look at this and we had to go through various iterations to get it right, and then AGAIN the next year. This was a bad experience.

It was all implemented in-house. The documentation is fairly up to date, for the most part.

Pricing is somewhat affordable compared to other solutions but in order to really lower the costs of other products you need to plan very carefully your resources usage, otherwise, it can get expensive real quick.

Unfortunately, it wasn't my call to include Datadog for this Company but sure I'm glad that the Lead Architect took this decision. It brought many improvements in a small span of time.

Please add PHP profiling soon!

We used Datadog to capture the salvatory of our AWS fleet of around 1,200 servers.

Datadog's ability to group and visualize the servers and the data makes it relatively easy for the root cause analysis.

Datadog lacks a deeper application-level insight. Their competitors had eclipsed them in offering ET functionality that was important to us. That's why we stopped using it and switched to New Relic.

Datadog's price is also high.

I have been using Datadog for about three years.

Stability really wasn't ever an issue. We didn't have any outages specific to Datadog where we couldn't get reports or insights to information. We were more concerned about the stability of our own systems and applications.

There was no issue with scaling as such. It didn't scale well only from the cost perspective.

Fortunately, because of the stability of the solution, we never had reasons to deal with technical support. Most of our interaction was with their product management, which was focused on the feature capability and ultimately pricing.

It didn't scale well from the cost perspective. We had a custom package deal.

We switched from Datadog to New Relic because it offered ET functionality. Datadog was traditionally born out of monitoring infrastructure. Over the years, they have improved their ability to give you insights at the application layer and to be considered under APM. New Relic really started at the application layer and has worked its way down. 

Ultimately, we were able to accept New Relic because coming from an operations team, infrastructure was more important. As our application became more complex, our application developers needed better insight. Because there is a significant overlap in the Venn diagram between Datadog and New Relic, we felt that the needs of the infrastructure team and the applications team could be met with New Relic and its expansion in providing a sort of lightweight security.

Datadog started off at the infrastructure level, and New Relic started off at the application level. Both of them were expanding not only into each other's space but also into the SIM space.

There are a lot of options out there. For folks like me, it becomes a costly proposition because, at the end of the day, we're talking about logs, events that get pushed out. I have to push out some to Datadog and some to the security event manager. Then you start to think why can't you just push them to one place and let a product do that. That's where these products are trying to grow. They're not quite there yet because the SIM space is pretty mature. An enterprise like ours needs something fully focused and dedicated. Startups can live with New Relic that has a security capability or Datadog.

I would advise you to really understand the value that you're trying to go after. Make sure that you're not trying to solve all problems that you have from the observability perspective with Datadog because that will erode the value you get out of this solution.

Make sure that you are going to use Datadog for infrastructure, and it is going to be great. If you start adding other kinds of stuff to it, you'll probably start losing some of that value. Especially, if you want to go for application-level monitoring, you may be a bit disappointed.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten. I'm a very price-conscious kind of purchaser.