Icinga vs. TrueSight Operations Management (discontinued)

Icinga is a world-class monitoring system. It can be used for most general monitoring situations. It is not a silver bullet, however, and there are instances where domain-specific monitoring systems are necessary. However, the output from those monitoring systems can be funneled into Icinga as a central monitoring and alerting system.

Incentivized

If you have a large or complex environment then this tool can be the perfect fit. From many types of OS, database, applications and web sites supported out of the box and powerful customization ability, TrueSight can manage the most complex. If you have a simple or small IT shop then this tool suite may be over-kill and not worth the complexity to set up

• Wealth of community-developed plugins.
• Stable codebase.
• Icinga 2 supports distributed monitoring.
• Very performant, can support tens of thousands of checks per server.

Incentivized

• Centralize all monitoring agents in one tool.
• Big catalog of monitoring types (KMs).
• Powerful event manager.

Incentivized

• High learning curve, setting up Icinga from scratch can be a bit of a challenge starting out.
• If the io2db process fails you UI stops updating, which can be very frustrating.
• There is no simple mechanism for adding new hosts and services through the web UI, it's all very config-file based.

Incentivized

• The interface is functional and adaptable but I kind of wish it looked like its predecessor Patrol Monitor.
• It is somewhat hard to understand the integrations into the UI.
• Hoping for more metric choices.

Incentivized

Icinga is a solid solution which does everything it promises. It is backwards compatible with most Nagios instances, making the transition very easy. Once you get the hang of installing new plugins and editing configuration files expanding its monitoring capabilities are easy.

Incentivized

Icinga is better than Nagios because of its nicer user interface. New Relic can monitor CPU/memory and disk usage, but it's more of a performance and application troubleshooting tool rather than monitoring

Incentivized

Datadog seems to have more freedom to build dashboards. They have more visualization types. However, Pulse seems to be better from a cost stand point. Pulse is able to accomplish everything we need, so no need to spend the extra cost.

Incentivized

• With one check you know which applications are faulty e.g. after an upgrade. Which is big time saver
• You easily detect outages ion the applications so that your customer ideally does not even realize there was an outage.
• Detect if the environment does deliver the same result as in the same time as before to detect shortages.
• Additional information when debugging. Saved us several hours where we could simply point to a database which was slow.

Incentivized

• We have not figured ROI at this time.