IBM Instana vs. Sensu, by Sumo Logic

I would recommend IBM Instana based on its strengths in automating application performance monitoring, dynamic tracing, and its ability to handle modern, containerized environments effectively. The automatic discovery and mapping feature, along with AI-powered anomaly detection, provide valuable insights for proactive issue resolution. However, I would consider factors such as the organization's specific technology stack, scalability requirements, and budget constraints. Conducting a thorough evaluation, including a trial or proof of concept, would be essential to ensure that IBM Instana aligns with our unique needs and contributes positively to our technology and business objectives.

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

• Collecting Kubernetes and Infra level logs and presenting in easy to understand visuals.
• Tracing the end-to-end journey of an event and also categorizing by technology and Endpoints
• Built-in and custom alerts help to monitor almost all of scenarios without much additional configuration.
• Ability to create Applications to logical group important flows

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

• I believe that the "live" option in monitoring does not truly update the status in real-time, thus I must manually update to feel comfortable.
• The call analysis tool might be improved, third-party resources are restricted, and the pricing is slightly more than competitors in comparable categories.

Incentivized

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

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

We chose IBM Instana for several reasons, and the most important one is that we didn't have to make changes in our code for nearly all of our applications for it to work. We are happy with the decision we made to use IBM Instana.

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

• System down time is shortened as our ability to troubleshoot issues goes up.
• Potential downtime is stopped as we are able to slow down calls/ availability of calls in response to monitoring the dashboard.
• We are able to react to issues quickly through the smart alert system rather than manual checks.

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