The solution is scalable. 

The solution is very scalable by design. 

I would rate the scalability an eight and a half out of ten.

Overall, I find Azure Monitor to be quite impressive. It's worth noting that there may be some aspects I haven't explored yet since learning opportunities arise daily. However, based on my experience with the features I have utilized thus far, I am genuinely satisfied with Azure Monitor's performance and capabilities.

Azure Monitor is applicable to companies of all sizes, ranging from small to mid-size to enterprise-level organizations. However, it's important to exercise caution and use it wisely, as Azure can become costly if resources are used unnecessarily. By utilizing Azure Monitor efficiently, you can effectively manage costs, optimize licensing, and ensure that resources are allocated appropriately to maximize value. 

When anticipating high traffic on virtual machines or app servers, you have the flexibility to adjust memory usage and CPU utilization accordingly. This allows you to effectively manage resources based on varying traffic patterns. Additionally, if you need to track logs and gain insights into application behavior, utilizing Application Insights is recommended. However, it's important to consider the data retention period carefully. Storing data for seven or fifteen days strikes a balance between retaining necessary information and managing costs, as charges are based on the storage size in gigabytes (GB), which can be relatively expensive.

Being a SaaS service, Azure Monitor is scalable. 

We'll continue with Azure Monitor.

It is a scalable solution. It's not a problem if you need to expand it. It reaches about 200 users right now. 

The product is scalable.

We have almost 23 users, and the network security zone has four users using the solution. Currently, we are not planning to add usage.

You can scale it pretty easily. I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of scalability. 

We probably have about 30 people using this solution.

Around 50,000 users are using the solution in our organization.

The scalability is highly commendable with around three hundred users currently using it within our organization. The application we are employing primarily caters to the education sector. It is currently in use by the Ministry of Education, in conjunction with their division offices, and the plan is to extend its usage to the school level. Upon full implementation, we anticipate the user base to grow significantly, reaching an estimated range of twenty to thirty thousand users.

Azure Monitor is scalable.

The scalability of Azure Monitor is very good because it is on a public platform.

We have approximately 500 users using this solution. We are extensively using Azure Monitor and we are always adding to it.

I rate Azure Monitor a nine out of ten for scalability. It's a cloud service, and we don't have any issues with it.

Azure Monitor is a key part of service integration and it is easy to scale and extend as needed. You can also integrate other services, even third-party ones, with it.

It provides options for scaling it to your own needs in various ways, such as by providing a choice of what types of logs will be generated and how many days you would like to keep the logs for. It also provides options for how many servers you would like to monitor, and whether you will be logging on an hourly, per-minute, or per-second basis.

It is a scalable solution but needs some improvement because of its policies.

Azure Monitor is useful at the enterprise level because it already has many resource monitoring solutions.

I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution's scalability as a ten.

Azure Monitor is very scalable - I'd rate its scalability ten out of ten.

Azure Monitor is scalable, and we have not encountered any issues.

The solution is scalable.

I haven't scaled it. We're still building things.

It is scalable and can scale to any size. Five people use this solution in our organization, primarily administrators, DevOps and security personnel. It requires about two to three people for deployment and maintenance. We have dedicated people from the monitoring team that do this. We plan to expand the number of users eventually.

I would rate the scalability of Azure Monitor a six out of ten.

It might be a case that there are certain services that are not available in other regions, but it's available in certain regions. You can face certain issues in one place and not another. You can't implement the same solution in all the regions. However, it might be a limitation of the cloud provider.

Azure Monitor is scalable, but the only downside to it is that it's not an out-of-the-box (OOTB) solution, so we cannot scale it to something outside of Azure ServiceNow. Currently, we use ServiceNow as a ticketing system, then use Datadog as the incident and alert system to trigger a ticket in ServiceNow, which we cannot do in Azure Monitor.

The solution is auto-scalable. I'd rate its ability to expand ten out of ten. It's a SaaS solution and does not require manual scaling. 

Our user base is about ten individuals. We don't have any more than that on it right now. We do not require it to expand too much in the future. 

Azure Monitor is a scalable solution.

The solution scales easily. It's not a big deal for Azure Monitor or any other APM product.

We have more than ten people using the solution.

We definitely do have plans to increase the usage but it depends on what the management calls. I'm not the authorized person to make calls here but we do have plans to increase the current infrastructure.

I haven't tested the solution for scalability but from the specifications it seems that it would be easily scalable. 

This is a scalable solution.

It's a service from Microsoft, so it will scale.

Right now, we're planning to increase usage. We're migrating from on-premises to the cloud. Currently, we have 25 users.

I'm not working with the solution directly and can't comment on the scalability.

Scalability has not been a problem.

I believe the program is scalable.

The solution is quite scalable, especially on the cloud. If a company needs to expand, it can easily do so. There aren't constraints.

The scalability of the solution is pretty good. A company has the capabilities of expanding if they need to.

I think the scalability is pretty good and you can plug-and-play pretty well. I'm not sure how well the product talks to other third-party tools, but overall the scalability is good. I don't think they are going to scrap the current model but they've got a lot of things that you can embed now with service help metrics. I think it is a pretty good bonus. There is a new upscale function as well, so scalability is pretty good.

To this point, my impression is that it is scalable and it is a good tool to find infrastructure and application problems in realtime. We are in the B2B market and our clients are enterprise-level companies.