I use ClickHouse and get logs from ClickHouse. I use Loki sometimes. Prometheus is always a thing with Grafana that I use hand-to-hand. Mostly it's Loki and ClickHouse.

I had tried to use TimescaleDB once, but it wasn't an easier option to integrate and set things up, so I just lifted it off and I'm using Loki and ClickHouse for now.

My company doesn't allow me to use any cloud-based services as of now, so everything has to be on-premises and self-hosted. For that reason, I don't use any additional third-party services. But in the near future, when I have the flexibility and liberty of doing it in my organization, I would definitely choose to go for third-party options.

I use GitLab. I use GitLab on our own independent storage servers over here and everything is in-house as I said. We use GitLab and version control all of our codebases and model artifacts and other assets locally in our own storage servers.

The main reason we use GitLab is because we are not supposed to store our code on any other external cloud services. We need to have our own in-house storage solution and in-house version controlling system. Any architecture that we design, we need to have it in-house and air-gapped from the rest of the world. Everything has to be in our control. The bare-metal vertical integration of having servers in our own premises is the reason why I use GitLab.

I appreciate the UI. It's very simple as well as intuitive at the same time. The biggest functionality that I appreciate is that GitLab gives you the liberty to self-host things on your own and keeps things on-premises, as well as being very API-friendly, similar to the original GitHub. There is no cumbersome learning curve to adapt GitLab separately from GitHub. It's a seamless transition switching from the standard GitHub to GitLab.

It's a good UI to work with. GitLab is a consolidation of all of the services. I can use my Docker container builds and my images and store them locally. I can pull those builds and use Docker as well as integrate Docker in the version control pipeline. It becomes very seamless. Sometimes my containers go down or I need to spin up a new node of a computer on its own in my local infrastructure. The system already has a cron job which goes and fetches the appropriate Docker, the latest Docker build with the correct Docker image and it pulls it off.

I would appreciate some more tutorials being put out in the mainstream media like on YouTube, where I could go and learn more about GitLab. Reading a deep dive into the documentation and meddling things on my own, then going and educating my whole team on that is a cumbersome task. I would appreciate if nice, customized YouTube tutorials would be available on YouTube by the official GitLab or maybe by some third-party YouTubers that you guys could partner with, similar to what PyTorch or Weights & Biases have done to democratize the use of their software tools. That would be great on my end.

I have been using GitLab Premium for exactly two years.

I would give a rating of eleven in that case, because we never had a downtime with GitLab Premium. It has never let us down.

I couldn't have an opinion on that because, as I said, we do things in-house. Scalability and the type of auto-scaling or scale-up that we need to do is on my system administrators.

I absolutely am still working with Grafana. For the most part, only partially for some small, tiny projects, I have moved to SigNoz. But for my main, primarily mega, mega foundational projects, the spectacular, the hero projects of my organization, I always prefer Grafana.

It is complex. It takes a good amount of time. Had I had to do it again, I would definitely use an AI agent to do it, because back then two years ago, when I was setting up GitLab Premium on my own in my enterprise, I had to take a good amount of four days to set things up and to seamlessly test everything so that things are working perfectly across my teams.

As of now, I haven't used that. My organization is pretty slim. Our technical team picks up things on their own and does things on their own independently. It's a one-man army kind of developer space in our organization. For that reason, we don't have any cross-communication with developers. Whatever happens, happens verbally, and for that reason, we don't use Jira or any other ticketing solutions.

It's not my responsibility. I have a system admin who looks into the security part of it, but we haven't meddled with any specific functionalities in the security side of it. Whatever we get standard in-house with the default configurations, we just use it.

There are several alternate solutions available.

We don't work in code review. Our developers write their own test cases. Once the test cases pass, the code goes into the specific another department. A solutions architect or a tech lead would be a suitable role for implementation of GitLab Premium. I give this product a rating of ten out of ten.

My main use case for GitLab is utilizing it in three main ways: one is using the Issues and Epics tracking for tasks, the second way is using the Wiki, which is the documentation feature, and then the third way is for code management.

Out of those three, I find myself using the Issues and Epics tracking feature the most often. I really quite like it because I find it clear and clean to use, and it works well when using it with numerous people.

We use the Issues feature to record our tasks and assign those out, as well as recording the description of what the task requires. Then we use the Epics feature to group the issues into categories, which makes it easier to track the tasks at a higher level.

In my opinion, the best features GitLab offers are the Issues and Epics feature, which I find very clean and clear to use, and it is very quick and responsive. I also quite value the Wiki feature because both of those are built into the same platform, making it very easy to bounce between the two and create links between the boards and the Wiki.

The ability to link between the boards and the Wiki helps my workflow and collaboration with my team by ensuring that if we have any tasks that need to be carried out, we have them on the Issues board, and we write runbooks in the Wiki on how to carry out the task. We copy the link of the Wiki and put it into the description of the tickets so that when someone is working on the ticket, they can very quickly go over to the Wiki and know how to carry out their task, which saves us time.

GitLab has positively impacted our organization by making our code very secure because GitLab prides itself on security. Storing code in GitLab is a very secure way to do it, and from an operational efficiency and time-saving perspective, the Issues and Epics board is definitely helpful, offering a few benefits operationally.

The only feature I have used in GitLab that I thought could be improved is their code generation feature. When I previously used it, some of my questions were met with responses saying that it did not know the answer, and some responses were incorrect as well. I understand this is something new for them, so they are still developing it, but I do not feel that it is in a position where I would use it regularly just because it is not very reliable right now.

I have been working in my current field between five to ten years.

GitLab is very stable. I have not seen any instability issues.

GitLab is highly scalable and could very easily scale to thousands of code repos, which is necessary for any organizational size.

The customer support for GitLab is very good, and I have no complaints because they have always been quite helpful. I would rate the customer support a ten out of ten because I have never had any issues with them before, and they are very knowledgeable.

Personally, I have previously used GitHub and Bitbucket as well. I find that GitLab has the cleanest and clearest UI out of all of them, and it has numerous features, such as the Issues and Epics tracking feature, as well as the Wiki feature, which sets it apart.

I have seen a return on investment. Any company that generates its own code and develops applications needs a code base, so it is more of a necessity rather than choosing something because it results in a measurable benefit. However, in terms of operational efficiency, a ten to twenty percent increase in speed could quite easily be seen from using the Issues and Epics tracking feature.

Regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing, to my understanding, GitLab offers competitive rates. There are a few big competitors within this space, such as GitHub and Bitbucket, so GitLab prices themselves competitively.

Before choosing GitLab, I did evaluate other options, and the main competitors I considered were GitHub and Bitbucket. They are great as well, and all three are brilliant, but GitLab, in my opinion, has the cleanest UI, which sets it apart.

I would recommend others to use GitLab because it is a great tool and there are not any real major drawbacks, just a minor one related to the AI code generation. I have given this review an overall rating of nine out of ten.

We are working with Black Duck, but we do have some plans to move to another vendor down the line.

Black Duck is used mostly for security checks. For coverage, we are using a tool called SonarQube.

Black Duck is explicitly used for security checks on code, for example, open-source software.

We perform scans with Black Duck Security Checker, but software developers handle the post-remediations and mitigation of risks and vulnerabilities.

For CI/CD, we are using GitLab Premium for our repositories. We have Artifactory for all artifact storage from JFrog Artifactory. We have Black Duck for security checks, SonarQube for coverage and unit testing, and Ansible for configuration management along with other tools.

These tools are used for our CI/CD pipelines, running all our pipelines and having unit test cases executed with SonarQube and Black Duck for security checks.

GitLab Premium is a one-place platform. You don't have to jump between other tools for multi-stage scanning. You can run multi-stage pipelines all together from building source code, testing source code, running test cases, performing security checks, deploying CI/CD, and end-to-end integration to deployment all in one place.

It is quick and fast. The pipelines run quicker, and the background job processes are efficient. It is multi-threaded operation so it is quite fast.

It is simple to use. You just need to have a good knowledge base, and by getting hands-on experience, you are all set.

It could be better, but now that we have migrated to Siemens Energy, GitLab Premium is being actively looked after by another team. We are just making sure that GitLab Premium administration is being done by us.

We are not using the security testing capabilities in GitLab Premium. For security we are using a separate tool.

The automation part could be improved. Nowadays AI is being actively used, and if we could integrate something like ChatGPT with GitLab Premium, it would be easier for us to check logs and debug faster.

We could integrate security and coverage built-in within GitLab Premium instead of relying on third-party tools.

I have been working with GitLab Premium for the last four years.

We stopped working with Chef. We do have Chef for releases and a different process for our own product where Chef is being used. However, I am not using Chef. Instead, we have switched to Ansible for most of our configuration management.

GitHub is a product I can compare with GitLab Premium.

GitLab Premium is much more reliable, quicker, faster, and basically easier to operate compared to GitHub. It is easy to get things on track. GitHub requires a lot of knowledge. It is easy to spin up any kind of environment and it is easy to be hosted.

We were on the desktop, and now GitLab Premium is on cloud.

I am not really sure about the purchase process for GitLab Premium.

I am a GitLab Premium end-user.

I give this product a rating of eight out of ten.