We performed a comparison between Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline and Pico Corvil Analytics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, ServiceNow, Microsoft and others in Event Monitoring."The most valuable feature is NetFlow."
"The solution is straightforward to set up."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the encryption feature. From a security perspective, the solution hasn't significantly strengthened our security posture. However, it has greatly improved performance by streamlining encryption processes and avoiding encryption at multiple layers. This has also simplified troubleshooting, as we can whitelist certain processes."
"It is a good product. It provides network visibility, which is important. Gigamon can bring some optimizations to my network. It is helpful for security inspection, and it makes my firewall work fast because my firewall doesn't have to do the inspection of the SSL connections, for example."
"It has high stability."
"The most valuable feature for improving network visibility with Gigamon is the packet filtering capability."
"It offers straightforward integration."
"We like the dashboards because they essentially organize all the sessions into one viewpoint."
"We can use CLI with the UI for configuring the new monitoring system, which is good."
"We're able to quickly drill down and find answers to events that are happening in real-time, using Corvil's analytics tools. That's the feature which is most in the spotlight..."
"We use the data to analyze how much time we spend within the applications. Then, based on that, we are doing multiple analyses and types of investigations to work on reducing the amount of time spent on the latency, which helps our applications."
"As part of my role in monitoring multiple client connections, I would use Pico Corvil Analytics to set up alerts for performance issues, such as TCP resends and dropped packets. These alerts would trigger when the volume was low and performance was poor, allowing me to work with our trading partners to find a resolution. I would present them with the statistics I had and together, we would identify the source of the issue. This collaboration resulted in the client often reconfiguring their systems. For example, we may find that a network connection needed to be made. Overall, this proactive approach helped to maintain strong connections with our clients and minimize disruptions to trading revenue."
"The performance metrics are pretty good. We've got everything from the network layer to the actual application layer. We can see what's going on with things like sending time and batching."
"It allows us to trace the flow. The logic is built sufficiently for us to be able to break down clients' orders, underlying child orders, and execution. Thus, it's a good way for us to trace client flow through a myriad of different internal systems."
"It has all the decoders so it's capturing every network packet and it's decoding in real-time and it's giving us latency information in real-time... It's the real-time decoding and getting the latency information statistics that we find the most useful."
"It only inspects a specific kind of traffic. There should be different kinds of use cases."
"The security should be improved."
"Its filtering feature needs improvement."
"The graphical user interface could be improved."
"In terms of improvement, while the initial setup is not overly complicated, we did encounter a few issues."
"The Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline should have a feature showing the traffic flow within its platform. Currently, customers have to use separate tools for monitoring, which is inconvenient. If it had its visibility feature, it would make monitoring easier and more complete without needing extra tools."
"They should increase the solution's cluster capacity."
"The creation of charts and real-time windows was somewhat cumbersome. The vendor's website had an application called App Agent that required improvement. This API was designed to track message rates between microservers ingested into a microservice memory map. It allowed users to monitor the number of transactions that occurred at specific points within the application, and it was quite impressive. However, it had some limitations, and it mainly served as a tool for basic tracking. The protocols it employed could reveal the type of server-to-server communication and the specific order types, but it was not able to provide a more in-depth analysis of the application. The vendor has the potential to integrate application metrics more extensively into their product suite."
"While the product is scalable, it's not easy to scale. It needs investment hardware and network bandwidth consideration. It's not something you can just do overnight."
"I have seen errors where the CNE and the CMC haven't synced because of something missing in the CMC, which was there in the CNE. We would get some type of error, but it doesn't actually say what exactly was missing in the CNE."
"Overall, the Corvil device needs a little bit of training for people to handle it. If that could be reduced and made more user-friendly, more intuitive, it would be better."
"For FIX protocol, maybe we could have built-in configurations for signatures and decoders. Also, for certain protocols, which are newer, we would like to just add the signatures within the decoders itself."
"Alerting isn't great... you can only put in one email address in. And that's for all kinds of alerting on the box."
"Before I got the Corvil training... one thing that was not very efficient was that every time you had to create a new stream or a new session from within Corvil... you had to tell it what protocol the message is going to come through and how to correlate messages, etc... After I went for the training, they had already added these nice features in the 9.4 version where it could do auto-discovery... Based on the traffic that it has already seen, it could create sessions on the fly."
"The analytics feature is very nice, but it's mostly software. We are hoping that it could be embedded in ASICs, so it could be faster."
More Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline Pricing and Cost Advice →
Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline is ranked 10th in Event Monitoring with 7 reviews while Pico Corvil Analytics is ranked 51st in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline is rated 8.6, while Pico Corvil Analytics is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline writes "Stable solution with good technical support service". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pico Corvil Analytics writes "Helpful support agents, beneficial issue detection, and high availability". Gigamon Deep Observability Pipeline is most compared with Ixia Network Packet Brokers, Cisco Nexus Dashboard Data Broker, Arista Data ANalyZer, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas Pico Corvil Analytics is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, ITRS Geneos and ThousandEyes.
We monitor all Event Monitoring 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.