HPE OneView vs. Sensu, by Sumo Logic

HPE Oneview has come along way. When they first put it out it was next to useless. Over the years and versions, they listened to feedback and have made OneView into a truly enterprise-level robust management product. It is now a far better product than the old C7000 Blade OAs, and HP SIM. It makes management of hardware easy and makes much of the maintenance easier and safer than before. For the storage side it does a great job and is intuitive to use, but the very versatility of how you can do things can lead to issues if multiple engineers do things differently.

Incentivized

• Well suited for raising pagers when you have count-based metrics.
• Well suited for threshold-based metrics.
• Not well suited for tracking events over the day, since graphs and other visualizations are missing.

Incentivized

• Managing the overall Blade profiles and the ability to have access to all equipment from one central repository.

Incentivized

• Unique concept as a "monitoring router" that can tie services together.
• Backward-compatible with Nagios environments.
• More of a DevOps focus than Nagios.

Incentivized

• Managing the 3Pard Oneview will allow you to do things like reuse LUN IDs and setup multiple export groups with the same volume. This can cause performance issues, or worse. They could do a better job of protecting you from yourself...
• Complicated initial configuration

Incentivized

• Cannot be solely used for tracking metrics over time.
• Not a very good UI.

Incentivized

Support and training when we implemented OneView were excellent. We haven't required any additional support since we put it in and configured it for our systems. The OneView systems have been stable through updates and HPE documentation is excellent.

Incentivized

Sensu's customer support was always willing to work with us but never really seemed to learn much from our experiences. I think they get a lot of customers with DevOps IT teams that are willing to put in a lot of elbow grease to get the most of Sensu's architecture. However, despite explaining my continued disappointment with their documentation and the overall flow of the product, I never got much more than a "sorry" and a notice that their documentation was open source if I wanted to contribute to it. The problem, of course, is that you can't document what you don't understand. I'm a former technical writer, so I know that better than most.

Incentivized

If you are using modern HPE equipment there really are no alternatives.

Incentivized

Have used New Relic and Sematext Cloud for APM and for tracking over days and visualizing the issues. But those are very expensive as compared to Sensu.

Incentivized

• No impact one way or the other for us.

Incentivized

• Standing up the Sensu Go server took very little effort.
• Setting up and maintaining the build processes and deployment logic for Sensu assets and checks was somewhat exhausting and resulted in lower adoption among non-DevOps IT.
• The limited web interface resulted in lower adoption among non-DevOps IT.

Incentivized