My main use case for Datadog is application monitoring and alerting.

A specific example of how I use Datadog for application monitoring and alerting is monitoring for storage filling up.

I also monitor services to ensure that they're running when they should be, and then I schedule downtimes for whenever they shouldn't be.

In my experience, the best features Datadog offers are integrations with ServiceNow and PagerDuty and the large variety of other third-party integrations.

The integrations with ServiceNow and PagerDuty have helped my workflow because whenever there's an issue, we can get notified quickly, and whoever is on call, if it's after hours, can be notified that there's an issue going on.

Dashboards are nice for quick and easy access to important and useful information, and logs are a great place to review information quickly and easily without connecting to the application directly.

Datadog has positively impacted my organization by allowing for a more proactive response to issues whenever they occur.

Being more proactive has helped by reducing downtime and improving our response to resolution. It has helped us limit business impact whenever there are issues that arise.

I believe Datadog could be improved because sometimes it's not the most user-friendly, and when monitors have a new metric or a service that no longer needs to be monitored, it remains in the system. It could be user error, but it would be nice to remove a specific service or part of a monitor from continuing to be monitored if there's no data being collected anymore.

Documentation sometimes is a little misleading or confusing, and there are multiple versions available, so having more up-to-date or clearer documentation regarding which version it applies to would be good.

I have been using Datadog for two, two and a half years.

Datadog is stable.

Datadog's scalability has been pretty scalable from what we've done in our organization.

The customer support is very good; it's easy to get support on pretty much any question that we have, including being able to chat in.

We previously used LogicMonitor, and I was not involved in the discussions on why we switched.

It's a pretty steep learning curve to start using Datadog; it takes time to really configure everything.

I would say we have seen a return on investment, but I don't have any relevant metrics.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it was good; I wasn't too involved with it, but as far as I know, it was smooth.

Before choosing Datadog, we did evaluate other options, but I'm not sure what those options were.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Datadog an 8.

My main use case for Datadog is monitoring and collecting metrics. I use it to collect metrics from Kubernetes pod CPU and memory usage, and also logging, basically all our middleware platforms.

The best features Datadog offers are the ability to collaborate between different metrics such as logging, metrics, and APM, which helps me to pinpoint when I'm troubleshooting issues. The dashboard is very useful; I can use it to get a glance on how the system performs, and alerting is what I'm using right now to send notifications to either email or PagerDuty.

Datadog has positively impacted my organization by shortening our time to resolve incidents because it's a central place for getting all the data that we need for troubleshooting.

I think Datadog can be improved by adding anomaly detection, that would be nice. The user interface is okay, but sometimes cost is the issue because for logging, I had to actually trim down my logs because the cost is too much.

I have been using Datadog for several years.

Datadog is stable.

Datadog's scalability is quite good since it's a SaaS solution, and there are no scalability issues for me. I simply install an agent for whatever new component, server, or host I want to monitor, and then I'm good.

The customer support is hit and miss. Sometimes they respond fairly quickly, but it depends on the person, and it may take a couple of communications for them to actually understand what I need.

I previously used some open-source solutions from other vendors before Datadog. The switch was made to get a better observability stack.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing indicates that the pricing is based on usage. When we adopt more, we get more, so everything is based on our desire to improve adoptability for the entire studio, then cost becomes a main issue.

Before choosing Datadog, I evaluated other options, including Dynatrace, which was approximately 10 years ago.

My advice to others looking into using Datadog is that if cost is not a concern, I would recommend them to use it. However, if they are sensitive or concerned about how much money they want to spend, then maybe Datadog is not the solution for them.

I would rate Datadog overall as eight out of ten, though I find it too costly.

Our main use case for Datadog is that we heavily rely on it for our infrastructure monitoring and application monitoring, including some of the browser-based application monitoring, which is RUM.

A specific example of how we use Datadog for monitoring is that we monitor our infrastructure CPU and memory utilization. Sometimes we see slowness and figure out CPU utilization was near the threshold, around 90-95%, which helped us to resolve the issue, underlying SQL problem, and that helped us to troubleshoot the issue.

In addition to our main use case, we also use RUM monitoring and synthetic monitoring, which really help us to look at our end-user sessions and proactively solve any slowness or errors spiking up.

The best feature that Datadog offers is infrastructure monitoring, where it can look at the CPU utilization, different process utilization, all the processes which are running, and alert us in advance if things are going beyond normal threshold.

I think everything about the features of Datadog is amazing. Datadog provides details up to the transactions. We can look at the transaction log too for the application, which is really helpful.

Datadog has impacted our organization positively since we were previously using AppDynamics and then we switched to Datadog. It has improved a lot in our alerting and monitoring in the infrastructure space and application space. We can monitor business transactions and take proactive action. It is really great to take actions on the issues before an end user reports it, which is a great advantage for us.

The world is moving toward artificial intelligence, so maybe we can have an inbuilt AI agent within Datadog, or maybe it exists and I have not used it.

The AI aspect would be great where we would not need to go and look at different transactions or different modules of Datadog, as AI can actually provide the data to us on Datadog UI. If we need more details, it could have a link to go to that specific module to look at more details for the application and infrastructure monitoring and alerts.

I have been using Datadog for three years now.

Datadog is stable for our organization, and we have not seen any downtime or issues so far.

Datadog's scalability has been great as it has been able to grow with our needs. As per our need, we are able to utilize different modules and there was never any need where we needed to scale anything else. We have limited our transition recording to 45 days, which helps. That is what our need is. It is really helpful and nothing additional is needed.

We reached out to Datadog only once to find out our AMI images, which we needed for our infrastructure as a code component, and it was a great experience. We got the required information and that helped us.

Before Datadog, we previously used OpsRamp and also AppDynamics, and both of the tools we retired and moved to Datadog due to our enterprise approach to consolidate overall monitoring to Datadog.

I gave Datadog a nine out of ten because it is amazing. All the features and functionalities are amazing. The ease of implementation was a bit difficult for us for the database servers where we have different kinds of databases. We needed different kinds of agents to be installed, and that was a bit tricky for us. I think it is not on Datadog but it is about our complex infrastructure where we have a different set of infrastructure in place, so that created a bit of trouble during the implementation.

Since using Datadog, we have seen a return on investment with a lot of savings around infrastructure monitoring, and also on the people needed to monitor overall application and infrastructure on both sides. Previously we had thirteen contractors doing the monitoring for us, which is now reduced to only five. That is a huge saving.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing Datadog, we went with Datadog directly.

My advice for others looking into using Datadog is to keep exploring the tool and utilize the different modules and the different functionalities of features Datadog offers. There are multiple features and functionalities available with the Datadog agents which are really helpful and powerful to troubleshoot, alert, and monitor both applications and infrastructure.

So far, all the features I have used in Datadog are amazing. It captures all the logging information which I have, and I can include the links of Datadog transactions on my Splunk logs. It is integrated with Splunk and other platforms, which is great.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Datadog a nine.

My main use case for Datadog is performance monitoring, SLOs, and SLIs.

For performance monitoring, SLOs, and SLIs, we create objectives and indicators around user feedback and stakeholder feedback. We have weekly meetings to create backlog items to work on if things have elapsed and gone into the red based on our SLO definitions.

The best features Datadog offers are the analytics that are all associated with each other. RUM data associated with APM, trace data, and all of that, including information around inferred requests, has been super useful. Machine health data gives a complete picture of performance, which has been extremely useful for troubleshooting difficult problems.

Having all that associated analytics helps me in troubleshooting by not having to bounce around to other tools, which saves me a lot of time. I know that the quality of Datadog metrics gathered is enough to where I can rule things in and out. This basically goes for any web app; when asking why a web app is slow, first you look at the code. If the code looks good, then you look at the hardware or the database. Being able to rule all of those out with one tool with one set of requests is useful.

Datadog has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to gather complete data instead of looking all over the place at incomplete data and actually make pointed determinations for fixing issues. It has helped increase efficiency and saved time.

I don't know how Datadog can be improved as they are doing a pretty good job.

I have been using Datadog for three years.

Datadog is stable.

Datadog's scalability is good.

The customer support is good.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is really expensive.

I have not seen a return on investment.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is really expensive.

My advice to others looking into using Datadog is that it is good and they should use it.

I don't know if my company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Datadog a 9.

My main use case for Datadog is application and portal monitoring.

For application or portal monitoring, we have several monitors set up that give us a heads up early when we believe there's a problem with end users getting to the applications that are available to them on the portal. Just yesterday, we were able to identify an error in code that was throwing thousands of errors a day, and it was very simple for us to actually find it using Datadog analytics on the error and the Watchdog alerts.

I don't have anything else to add about my main use case, other than the ease with which we were able to identify an issue that we previously, when we didn't have Datadog, might not even be aware of, but was consuming resources that it didn't need to.

In my opinion, the best features Datadog offers are flexibility and extensive support. It can be a little overwhelming since there are so many features that come with Datadog, and I'm just scratching the surface of that. I also appreciate the support that our representative has provided to us, coming on-prem, providing training, being available to answer questions, and the extensive knowledge base documentation that I have been referred to, which has been extremely helpful also.

The flexibility I mentioned shows up in my day-to-day work because traditionally, I was using SolarWinds to monitor infrastructure health, but the polling period is lengthier than we would like to see. Datadog specifically has real-time monitoring, and the alerts that we have configured are coming to us much quicker. We're able to address an issue sooner rather than later, and when it comes to reviewing .NET code or application configuration, I only had limited visibility, but with Datadog doing the analysis of the IIS logs and any other application logs, it's also opened up visibility to me so that I can assist a developer in identifying the area of concern or where a code could be more efficiently written.

Datadog has positively impacted my organization by helping us make our web portals more efficient. Our portals and integrations are extremely complex, and as we get the agent installed on more devices, it's really provided us visibility that we haven't had in my entire career with Ace Hardware.

I cannot provide specific numbers for the improved performance, but Datadog has identified issues that we have in our data source area. We have implemented additional indexes and have plans for breaking out complex queries that are pulling data across multiple data sources. We're in the crawl, walk, run phase, so right now we're identifying and prioritizing the things that need to be fixed. A few of the things that we've already addressed include adding additional resources to servers, and we have noticed improved performance. I know someone has the statistics; I just don't have them available to me at the moment.

At this point, I'm not sure how Datadog can be improved, but maybe some initial intense training from the vendor before setting us loose with the application is the only thing I can think of.

I think it would be helpful to have an administrative page right from the portal that gives us links to the application documentation. I have separate URLs to get to the various locations that I need to go to, but unless I'm just not seeing them, I have to go to separate URLs. I cannot get to some of the documentation and various other components from my company-specific portal.

Other than being restricted by cost, Datadog's scalability has been a little bit of a challenge to do the initial installation of the agent. We have upgraded all of our agents so that we can do the upgrades remotely, but the initial install is still a little time-consuming and a little clunky.

I think the customer support is great. I love the ability to send flares directly from the machine or device that's having an issue, and my tickets are always opened promptly. I usually get links to documentation about the specific feature or function that I'm trying to implement, and when I have additional questions, the ticket is updated with actual recommendations or suggestions pointing me in the correct direction.

We continue to use SolarWinds, although I can see the infrastructure monitoring component of SolarWinds being replaced with Datadog. We also used Catchpoint to run synthetic scripts from various locations throughout the country, and we use Pingdom for our e-commerce solution. We're trying to phase out Pingdom at this time with the help of Datadog engineers, and we have ceased using Catchpoint because we have created those synthetic scripts within Datadog.

At this point, I'm leaving the return on investment metrics to my manager and director. I'm just focused on getting it up and running, installed, upgraded, and helping to train other folks to use it. I know they're trying to keep metrics on all of those questions, but I'm just not focusing on that at this time.

I was not included in the pricing, setup cost, and licensing decisions, but I have needed to gain more information about licensing and individual feature cost projections. Everybody wants the agent installed, but we only have so many dollars to spread across, so it's been difficult for me to prioritize who will benefit from Datadog at this time.

I'm excited to learn more about the application and can't wait as my knowledge expands, all the exciting things that we might be able to do with the tool.

I rate Datadog an 8 out of 10, only because I haven't had the ability to explore everything that I intend to explore, and some of the more complex monitors that I want to create I'm just not able to intuitively do. But that might be on me and not the product. The complexity and my lack of knowledge related to all the features and how I can use them keep it from being a 10 for me.

I would advise others looking into using Datadog to do more training and become much more familiar with the product before going live with it. There are so many wonderful things that can be done with it that it's a little overwhelming to only attempt to configure those or investigate them when the product's already live.

I'm excited to continue to learn and explore the tool. It's giving me some insight into systems that I have not had for the past 17 years, so it's exciting to be able to see that and put it to use almost immediately.

The primary purposes for which Datadog is used include infrastructure monitoring and application monitoring.

The main use case for Datadog integration capabilities is to monitor workloads in public cloud, and those public cloud integrations that reached the public cloud metric natively were helpful or critical for us. We are not using Datadog for AI-driven data analysis tasks, but more cloud-native and vendor-native tools at the moment, and at the time when I was still in my last employer, we didn't use Datadog for the AI piece at all.

I find alerting and metrics to be the most effective features of Datadog for system monitoring. It was still cheaper to run Datadog than other alternatives, so the running costs were cheaper because it was SaaS and quite easy to use.

Datadog is only available in SaaS.

The pricing nowadays is quite complex.

In future updates, I would like to see AI features included in Datadog for monitoring AI spend and usage to make the product more versatile and appealing for the customer.

I have been using Datadog since 2014.

There were no problems with the deployment of Datadog.

The deployment of Datadog just took a few hours.

The challenges I encountered while using Datadog were in the early days when the product was missing the ability to monitor Kubernetes and similar features, but they have since added those features. At the moment, I don't think there are too many challenges that I am worrying about.

One person is enough to do the installation.

I am not working with any of these solutions currently because I'm on sabbatical, but I used to work with Datadog six months ago, and now at the moment I'm on sabbatical.

We were using the tools that AWS and Azure came with natively to monitor the AI workflows on their platforms.

I used to work as the CTO at Northcloud, but I no longer work there.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Datadog an eight out of ten.

The technology itself is generally very useful and the interface it great.

There should be a clearer view of the expenses.

I have used the solution for four years.

The solution is stable.

I have not personally interacted with customer service. I am satisfied with tech support.

I am using ThousandEyes and Datadog. Datadog supports AI-driven data analysis, with some AI elements to analyze, like data processing tools and so on. AI helps in Datadog primarily for resolving application issues.

It was not difficult to set up for me. There was no problem.

I can confirm there is a return on investment.

I find the setup cost to be too expensive. The setup cost for Datadog is more than $100. I am evaluating the usage of this solution, however, it is too expensive.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.

We use Datadog for monitoring and observing all of our systems, which range in complexity from lightweight, user-facing serverless lambda functions with millions of daily calls to huge, monolithic internal applications that are essential to our core operations. The value we derive from Datadog stems from its ability to handle and parse a massive volume of incoming data from many different sources and tie it together into a single, informative view of reliability and performance across our architecture.

Adopting Datadog has been fantastic for our observability strategy. Where previously we were grepping through gigabytes of plaintext logs, now we're able to quickly sort, filter, and search millions of log entries with ease. When an issue arises, Datadog makes it easy to track down the malfunctioning service, diagnose the problem, and push a fix.

Consequently, our team efficiency has skyrocketed. No longer does it take hours to find the root cause of an issue across multiple services. Shortened debugging time, in turn, leads to more time for impactful, user-facing work.

Our services have many moving parts, all of which need to talk to each other. The Service Map makes visualizing this complex architecture - and locating problems - an absolute breeze. When I reflect on the ways we used to track down issues, I can't imagine how we ever managed before Datadog.

Additionally, our architecture is written in several languages, and one area where Datadog particularly shines is in providing first-class support for a
multitude of programming languages. We haven't found a case yet where we
needed to roll out our own solution for communicating with our instance.

A tool as powerful as Datadog is, understandably, going to have a bit of a learning curve, especially for new team members who are unfamiliar with the bevy of features it offers. Bringing new team members up to speed on its abilities can be challenging and sometimes requires too much hand-holding. The documentation is adequate, but team members coming into a project could benefit from more guided, interactive tutorials, ideally leveraging real-world data. This would give them the confidence to navigate the tool and make the most of all it offers.

The company was using it before I arrived; I'm unsure of how long before.

We use Datadog across the enterprise for observability of infrastructure, APM, RUM, SLO management, alert management and monitoring, and other features. We're also planning on using the upcoming cloud cost management features and product analytics.

For infrastructure, we integrate with our Kube systems to show all hosts and their data.

For APM, we use it with all of our API and worker services, as well as cronjobs and other Kube deployments.

We use serverless to monitor our Cloud Functions.

We use RUM for all of our user interfaces, including web and mobile.

It's given us the observability we need to see what's happening in our systems, end to end. We get full stack visibility from APM and RUM, through to logging and infrastructure/host visibility. It's also becoming the basis of our incident management process in conjunction with PagerDuty.

APM is probably the most prominent place where it has helped us. APM gives us detailed data on service performance, including latency and request count. This drives all of the work that we do on SLOs and SLAs.

RUM is also prominent and is becoming the basis of our product team's vision of how our software is actually used.

APM is a fundamental part of our service management, both for viewing problems and improving latency and uptime. The latency views drive our SLOs and help us identify problems.

We also use APM and metrics to view the status of our Pub/Sub topics and queues, especially when dealing with undelivered messages.

RUM has been critical in identifying what our users are actually doing, and we'll be using the new product analytics tools to research and drive new feature development.

All of this feeds into the PagerDuty integration, which we use to drive our incident management process.

Sometimes thesolution changes features so quickly that the UI keeps moving around. The cost is pretty high. Outside of that, we've been relatively happy.

The APM service catalog is evolving fast. That said, it is redundant with our other tools and doesn't allow us to manage software maturity. However, we do link it with our other tools using the APIs, so that's helpful.

Product analytics is relatively new and based on RUM, so it will be interesting to see how it evolves.

Sometimes some of the graphs take a while to load, based on the window of data.

Some stock dashboards don't allow customization. You need to clone them first, but this can lead to an abundance of dashboards. Also, there are some things that stock dashboards do that can't yet be duplicated with custom dashboards, especially around widget organization.

The "top users" widget on the product analytics page only groups by user email, which is unfortunate, since user ID is the field we use to identify our users.

I've used the solution for three and a half years.

The solution is pretty stable.

The solution is very scalable.

Support was excellent during the sales process, with a huge dropoff after we purchased the product. It has only recently (within the past year) they have begun to reach acceptable levels again.

We did not have a global solution. Some teams were using New Relic.

The instructions aren't always clear, especially when dealing with multiple products across multiple languages. The tracer works very differently from one language to another.

We handled the setup in-house.

We have built our own set of installation instructions for our teams, to ensure consistent tagging and APM setup.

We did look at Dynatrace.

The service was great during the initial testing phase. However, once we bought the product, the quality of service dropped significantly. However, in the past year or so, it has improved and is now approaching the level we'd expect based on the cost.