We performed a comparison between Datadog and InfluxDB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The platform appeals to companies spanning many industries on a global scale."
"Having a clear view, not only of our infrastructure but our apps and services as well, has brought a great added value to our customers."
"It brings in observability, monitoring, and alerting capabilities - all of which we need to operate at scale."
"Datadog has clear dashboards and good documentation."
"The integration and configuration are incredibly simple. The SaaS offering is remarkably easy to set up, especially if you're coming from a Graphite environment or anything that uses a StatsD."
"Dashboards and their versatility are among the most valuable features."
"The integration into AWS is key as well as our software is currently bound to AWS."
"Flame graphs are pretty useful for understanding how GraphQL resolves our federated queries when it comes to identifying slow points in our requests. In our microservice environment with 170 services."
"InfluxDB is a database where you can insert data. However, it would be best if you had different components for alerting, data sending, and visualization. You need to install tools to collect data from servers. It must be installed on Windows or Linux servers. During installation, ensure that the configuration file is correct to prevent issues. Once data is collected, it can be sent to InfluxDB. For visualization, you can use open-source tools like Grafana."
"In our case, it started with a necessity to fill the gap that we had in monitoring. We had very reactive monitoring without trend analysis and without some advanced features. We were able to implement them by using a time series database. We are able to have all the data from applications, logs, and systems, and we can use a simple query language to correlate all the data and make things happen, especially with monitoring. We could more proactively monitor our systems and our players' trends."
"The most valuable features of InfluxDB are the documentation and performance, and the good plugins metrics in the ecosystem."
"The most valuable features are aggregating the data and integration with Graphana for monitoring."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to use. It provides a clear overview of the data, making it simple to understand the information at hand."
"InfluxDB's best feature is that it's a cloud offering. Other good features include its time-series DB, fast time-bulk queries, and window operations."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is we can use InfluxDB to integrate with and plug into any other tools."
"The solution is very powerful."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Datadog is so feature-rich that it is often hard to onboard new folks and tough to decide where to invest time."
"Datadog could make their use cases more visible either through their docs or tutorial videos."
"The dashboard could be improved. It would be helpful to get a view of specific things that we need to monitor for our application."
"I think better access to their engineers when we have a problem could be better."
"Lately, chat support has a longer waiting time."
"We need to learn more about the session reply feature inside of DD."
"Datadog has a lot of features kind of cramped into one dashboard. It's quite hard to get around what feature does exactly what. There was a steep learning curve, trying to navigate through menus."
"The documentation could be improved regarding setting up the agent properly and debugging."
"I've tried both on-premises and cloud-based deployments, and each has its limitations."
"The error logging capability can be improved because the logs are not very informative."
"The solution doesn't have much of a user interface."
"The solution's UI can be more user-friendly."
"InfluxDB cannot be used for high-cardinality data. It's also difficult and time-consuming to write queries, and there are some issues with bulk API."
"InfluxDB is generally stable, but we've encountered issues with the configuration file in our ticket stack. For instance, a mistake in one of the metrics out of a hundred KPIs can disrupt data collection for all KPIs. This happens because the agent stops working if there's an issue with any configuration part. To address this, it is essential to ensure that all configurations are part of the agent's EXE file when provided. This makes it easier to package the agent for server installation and ensures all KPIs are available from the server. Additionally, the agent cannot encrypt and decrypt passwords for authentication, which can be problematic when monitoring URLs or requiring authentication tokens. This requires additional scripting and can prolong service restart times."
"InfluxDB can improve by including new metrics on other technologies. They had some changes recently to pool data from endpoints but the functionality is not good enough in the industry."
"In terms of features that I would like to see or have, in the community version, some features are not available. I would like to have clustering and authentication in the community version."
Datadog is ranked 2nd in Network Monitoring Software with 137 reviews while InfluxDB is ranked 46th in Network Monitoring Software with 8 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while InfluxDB is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of InfluxDB writes "A powerful, lightweight time series database with a simple query language and easy setup". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas InfluxDB is most compared with MongoDB, Cassandra, Netdata, ScyllaDB and Zabbix. See our Datadog vs. InfluxDB report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.