Airbrake vs. Original Software TestAssist

Airbrake is very good at what it does, I don’t really have any criticism at all on that front. It’s less well-suited when bugfixing goes beyond the immediate error and means looking at a lot of context (particularly asynchronous context) like logs.

Incentivized

• Integration with most of languages and frameworks as well support via existing logging configs.
• Aggregations on occurrences which helps to understand and analyse issues better.
• Web UI displays all error related parameters which I never could have figured out in manual debugging.

• We use Airbrake in conjunction with OpsGenie, but I feel like there could be more room for integration between the two.
• I think it would also be nice if there was a GitHub integration that would comment on recently merged error-prone PRs, currently, we need to dig into the error to find the commit.
• Generally, more integrations would be nice as people often forget about Airbrake when they are stressed out about an issue.

Incentivized

I love to use Airbrake and New Relic in conjunction. New Relic has better metrics and data that you can really dig into (especially for optimizations), but the error part has always been kinda meh. I fee like Airbrake has done an awesome job at this

• Hugely reduced frontend errors in devices we don’t often test: means more conversions and sales
• Lets us know immediately when there is an error: shorter error durations also means higher sales
• Ultimately once we’ve solved all the most common bugs: more time for developers to focus on other things

Incentivized