The product's drawback is the licensing pricing. It could be better.

The application end of AppDynamics Database Monitoring needs to improve by checking which applications consume licenses. We are not getting any details from the AppDynamics Database Monitoring portal. AppDynamics Database Monitoring's agent details must be enhanced, so each agent needs to show what kind of technology is being used. I would like to have agent details from AppDynamics Database Monitoring.

We are not getting related information and agent details from AppDynamics Database Monitoring. For example, if we have one hundred APM licenses and have onboarded multiple applications, there are no details about which technology uses which kind of agent.

Other solutions have one agent that gathers information on all kinds of server components. However, with AppDynamics Database Monitoring, we don't have any universal solution related to application instrumentation, server performance, stats, server component stats, and service stats. We would like to have better server components.

The solution needs to support IBM products. 

The solution must improve security and setup. It runs off its own box now. The metrics could be standardized. It should add more databases.

They could align the product strategy to evolve as a complete solution similar to Cisco Observability.

AppDyanmics requires better technical people to support the solution. It is not as simple as just implementing and walking away. You need someone to maintain the solution. The day-to-day activities should be less complicated so that anyone can manage them. The administration should not be an overhead.

The product requires high maintenance. We need a dedicated resource to manage it because the solution manages a complex environment.

One of the key features that are missing is the ability to manage users centrally, which is a real pain when it does not happen. That is a feature that their main competitor has had for quite some time. I'm surprised they don't have it already.

I believe they need to increase their level of visibility in the infrastructure, particularly in the infrastructure monitoring section, which currently lacks visibility.

The license model is a bit complex. They should make it a little bit easier, which I believe they will do in the next quarter, or in the next two quarters. I also dislike it because it is based on CPU, which will increase the cost of deployment and licensing. They currently have a complex model and charge on a per-node basis. They plan to change this in the future to make it less complicated, but it will be more expensive because it will be done on a CPU basis rather than a node basis. And this is not good. I deducted one point for that.

The price of the solution has room for improvement.

I would like the solution to be more customizable to meet our client's requirements.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring would be a better product if it could support new technology, such as cloud technology. Even Dynatrace lacks support for newer technologies.

The major concern lies with reports, specifically their configurability. It's like, if I want to combine multiple reports and generate them all at once, that's not possible. Even though there's a setup for generating 25 reports, I wanted to group them all and generate them in one go, which isn't currently feasible. I have to manually run each report and set the time for it. There should be an option to schedule them collectively, like selecting 10 reports, setting a particular time, and having them scheduled.

The ability to schedule multiple reports at once, which is currently lacking. This is a challenge I face in my day-to-day work with AppDynamics.

We are having a problem where one of our tenants has had issues with availability over the past two months. There is a lot of downtime for the SaaS tenant. Based on the user experience feedback that we have had, I think that the most important thing to improve is the availability of the SaaS, the cloud environment.

The mobile application needs to be improved.

We are evaluating a solution from SAP, and we are interested in is seeing the integration or the interface, and what we can get out of these new probes. We had a conference call with AppDynamics and challenged them to resolve the SAP solution monitoring so that it works side-by-side with our critical applications.

I have found it sometimes a bit difficult to trace the transaction all the way through to the application. I'm not sure if that problem is on the database side or on the application side, but that would be something that I would like to be improved. The traceability from the application to the database, sometimes, is a bit of a challenge. If you're using AppDynamics, with the Java agent, for instance, you need to be able to trace it through.

It could be more user-friendly for beginners.

AppDynamics needs to consolidate their technology agent types into one agent that could be deployed on any host no matter what the technology is that it is running. It is really the implementation of AppDynamics that is very difficult because it is very manual. They really need to improve upon that and do more to simplify user processes. So, I would like them to have a single agent type instead of an agent-based on the technology. I think that having a single binary agent that you can put onto any host would make it a lot easier to work with.  

The synthetic scripting for end-user monitoring could be a little bit broader. Instead of using just Python, they can include a few other languages so that not everyone has to jump on the bandwagon for Python and do Selenium scripting. They can open up that a bit to make it simpler for people to do the scripting.

On the dashboarding side, it's very difficult to do dashboards on the database portion because they don't let you include a lot of the elements in dashboards. They should give a bit more functionality and add more views from the database side. Other than that, all the clients I've worked with are very happy with it. It had everything they needed. No one had any complaints. Only on the application portion, do people get very confused if they're not tech-savvy, but on the database side, you usually work with tech-savvy people. So, the database and the elements are great.

The challenges that we face are all performance based, relating to business transactions, not database monitoring.

I definitely want to see some drill down capabilities, especially at the database layer, because the snapshot gives me up to a certain point where I can see the wait states. I can't really see at that particular point in time, a certain SQL was causing the issue in a real time basis, and I can alert someone on that basis. I definitely want to see some drill down capabilities at that layer.

I've seen some demos of the upcoming capabilities such as doing monitoring at the network layer. And then the EUM, the end user monitoring; I definitely will be looking forward to using those in the future.

I haven’t given it a perfect rating due to the future capabilities, which are definitely coming.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring would be improved with more support for microservices architecture.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring could improve the price of the solution, it is costly.

At a recent conference, I saw the log analytics, and I was very impressed with it. We are not going to use it, but I would like to see how that works out and whether it can be of any use with our applications. That is one thing I'm looking forward to if it comes to us, and if we get to implement that.

The way it was explained in the presentation is that we can actually correlate a particular event and we can see all of the aspects: on the database side, what happened at the time; in an application; and from the end user perspective – that holdup that you get in the one place by just a simple query. That's very interesting.
One thing for which we didn't get a clear answer is how taxing or how much overhead it can create on a database. We were told that the remote monitoring is the best way to do it. However, sometimes we have databases located across data centers that might be thousands of miles apart. That is something which I might want to see in the documentation: What are the specific recommendations about over WAN, within country? How they want to implement it?

I would rate the product higher if they improved the documentation.

This product has an issue with initial lag upon opening that we would like to see improved.

We would also like the capability to open multiple sessions of this product in a browser at the same time.

I'm only working as an administrator on the solution, so I'm not in a position to really discuss too many technical aspects of it. 

The application monitoring needs improvement. It needs to be easier for someone who isn't a proficient developer. 

For example, if we use Java for monitoring events to gather history-based data in regards to the application, it should provide a better core-controller. When we monitor any Java application, the approach for us is to identify a set of classes as part of Java programming. These particular classes needs to be executed so any end-user using AppDynamics would be able to see the culprit class. There shouldn't be a need for a final report. Yet, we don't have a feature like that at this time. A person who is monitoring everything needs to have very good knowledge about the solution and not everyone is a proficient programmer.

It would be helpful to have a dashboard and artificial intelligence for error detection and correlation for future releases. 

An improvement could be if the monitoring was able to be summarized into something more clear and simple for people who don't have the technical skills on the database side.

The solution needs to have some prepared dashboards on the database. When we use AppDynamics we have a lot of screens and we have to jump from one screen to another. It would useful is if, on the database, monitoring required merely a click on a button and then you have the monitoring dashboard that you can display for easy access.

We also use Oracle Fusion and the actual tracing of your transactions on Oracle Fusion is difficult because they use an asynchronous type of tracking between the nodes. It makes it difficult for AppDynamics to track.

The user access management could be a bit better.

The monitoring of different schemas within the database could be improved. They should split the dashboard into different schemas, instead of having one.

• Synthetic monitoring of applications and products in a better way would help to improve the product better.
• More OOB reports also would help.

The solution should add some monitoring similar to Oracle monitoring tools for databases. Oracle has a lot of features to monitor SQL queries, and make some recommendations to resolve them. AppDynamics is just monitoring for delays and doesn't provide any recommendations. It's a deficiency.

The solution could improve the server size for AppDynamics to include middleware products, which it doesn't yet cover. If they add middleware for sophisticated sites, AppDynamics would be the global choice.