TrustRadius Insights for Airbrake are summaries of user sentiment data from TrustRadius reviews and, when necessary, third party data sources.
Pros
Immediate Alerting Feature: Users have appreciated Airbrake's feature that allows for immediate alerting of issues, ensuring quick attention from the team. This functionality has been crucial in promptly addressing and resolving critical issues.
Slack Integration Benefit: Reviewers found the Slack integration provided by Airbrake to be beneficial for seamless communication and collaboration during error resolution. By leveraging this integration, teams can effectively coordinate efforts in real-time to address errors efficiently.
Configurability Highlighted: Customers valued the configurability of Airbrake, allowing them to customize notifications and alerts according to their specific needs. This flexibility enables users to tailor Airbrake to their workflow preferences, enhancing overall productivity.
We use Airbrake to track multiple things: the errors that appear in the console of the end-users, to make sure that our product works as intended and to get notified about any error before the user reaches out to our Customer Care team (and get more information about the error) track the failed API calls that we have sent from our frontend. We use this to check faulty implementations or how the user is misusing our software so we can foolproof it better :D we made it kinda a habit to keep an eye on those numbers, we don't strive to get it to 0 but for stability.
Pros
Report errors
Versioning
Cons
Aggregated errors are not so clear why they got grouped together
Not clear why some filters don't work
Likelihood to Recommend
If you care about tracking the quality of your implementation and connection between the frontend and backend. It is close to useless for old software that is outdated and generates lots of noisy errors because they usually spike for little reason and it is hard to tell real errors from the noisy ones.
It really helps to find odd issues that otherwise would be hidden. We even need it alongside other login solutions because it’s really made for Developer’s
Pros
Exception logging
Deployment management
Notifications
Jira integration
Cons
UI overhaul
Jira Flow
Likelihood to Recommend
Has already pointed out it’s very good to find all exceptions and arrows in the code and also allows to connect them to deployments to figure out if stuff really has solved the problems. It’s also good to have just a second opinion compared to other logging solutions. I usually trust Airbrake more than other solutions. It’s also good to integrate with Jira and Slack
Airbrake has been a very useful tool to troubleshoot issues or errors I experience during development and in the production environment. Airbrake has been useful to catch conditions we may not have caught during internal testing or catch unexpected use cases of our product which were not tested for during internal testing. This helps us with debugging and be able to resolve bugs in our product before escalation from our end users.
Pros
Alerts
Catch Edge cases
Debugging
Cons
Initial setup was little confusing
Likelihood to Recommend
Would recommend it to development teams who are looking for realtime debug information and be able to catch bugs before end uses discover them in production
In our organization, we use Airbrake for monitoring the exceptions thrown by server-sided applications. These applications are written using different frameworks like Ruby on Rails, Spring Boot, and Node.js.
Pros
Notifying us about exceptions which has been done via Slack Webhooks
See the detailed stack trace of the exception and give aggregated data about exceptions
Get the value of different request parameters which caused the exception which helps the team to replicate and debug the issue faster
Cons
When the request body is large and we try to pass it in the parameters for the Airbrake the request body gets truncated.
Likelihood to Recommend
Monitoring and Alerting about exceptions occurring in different environments is handled pretty efficiently by Airbrake. One can see the entire stack trace and also navigate to the exact file which caused the errors. Alerting can be done in a very efficient way by setting up webhooks on different products like Slack.
VU
Verified User
Engineer in Information Technology (201-500 employees)
Airbrake helps with letting us know of errors to look into, while also showing stack traces. This is extremely useful for debugging and to help make sure our software is running in tip-top shape.
Pros
Error Notifications
Stack Traces
Cons
missing information to help pinpoint debugging
Likelihood to Recommend
I honestly love the product. It has helped solved issues locating errors, where otherwise it would have taken a super long time.
We use it to monitor for errors. Create JIRA tasks from it. It's a one-stop tool to report and fix errors for us.
Pros
Aggregate errors
Monitor for errors
Reporting occurence of errors
Cons
Providing more details about an error
Ability to subscribe to specific errors
Reproducing an error
Likelihood to Recommend
Airbrake is well suited for one purpose more than others is for it be a places where all errors are reported. This way we don't have to look for errors in multiple places. All errors are aggregated and captured so which makes it easy for developers to go back to them to review and fix as necessary.
When I started work in the team here we didn’t have any frontend error alerting whatsoever, and all the backend alerts were based on filtered log analysis. This was fairly hard to work with, and I was sure we were missing a lot of errors. I pushed for, and then implemented, Airbrake on frontend and then backend and the benefits were large and immediate. We found hundreds of thousands of frontend errors were occurring, and the bulk of them were simple things to fix once we were aware. We also got more timely alerts about backend problems, helping us take a more proactive approach to fixing the system.
Pros
Frontend error alerting and analysis
Backend error alerting
Recording and prioritisation of errors based on frequency
Integration with deployment pipelines to check for errors in a new release
Cons
I would *love* (and pay more!) if Airbrake also provided an integrated log collection service that was aligned with the error reporting
It can be awkward to distinguish between errors in our frontend application and in browser plugins being run by users
Given how wide the aggregate view Airbrake themselves have, perhaps they could identify and suggest best-practice solutions to common errors?
Browser errors in different user locales show up separately in different languages, even though they are really the same error
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
We use Airbrake to actively monitor every end user's experience with our products. All of our services are monitored by Airbrake and it is the first place we check when something goes wrong. It has also helped detect several issues that went unreported.
Pros
Reports errors that aren't being reported to us
Helps to quickly identify which specific line of code is causing issues
Prioritizes issues by identifying which server created them
Cons
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.
Likelihood to Recommend
Airbrake is very well suited for quickly tracking down and identifying the root cause of bugs. It is also very good to make sure the recently shipped code is performing well. It is not as well suited for teams that already have several other platforms for monitoring, because it can be forgotten in lieu of performance dashboards etc.
We use Airbrake to monitor errors that occur in our Rails applications. We have many different applications and different environments, and Airbrake helps us catch errors at different stages of release. It also allows us to group errors and prioritize which ones to fix.
Pros
Airbrake has configurable notifications
Airbrake groups errors and allows sorting by most recent or most occurences
Airbrake has integrations with tools such as Jira
Cons
The error grouping can be confusing and seems inconsistent
Searching for errors is tricky
Sometimes errors don't include the relevant information in parameters, this is probably a configuration issue but it doesn't make it clear how to fix it.
Likelihood to Recommend
When building a Rails application, I would definitely recommend Airbrake. We also use logging services such as Datadog, which could have some overlapping functionality, but Airbrake is great at specifically monitoring errors.
