In terms of scalability, nothing has been able to beat it.

Currently, we have over 7 million objects monitored, and that's over 181,000 devices. We are still increasing. We're pulling in other customers who are using other tools into the SevOne. It's constantly expanding.

SevOne is highly scalable. It's a global cluster, so it can scale much higher than the current implementation. I'm aware of other customers with 80 nodes in their cluster. Your performance doesn't change with each node you add because each node in the cluster is designed to provide the full capabilities. As you add nodes, you keep increasing that capability. It doesn't affect your response times or anything for querying the data.

I have not reached the limit. My current company is a smaller enterprise, but I worked on SevOne with an enterprise of 80,000 employees. We had no problem scaling. I know there are much larger customers that scale the system up. I think part of the system design lends itself to scaling pretty well. I haven't found other products in the space to scale better.

It is scalable for us. We are probably pulling 1.2 million objects. There aren't that many bigger providers than us, and it covers the majority of our backbone, core access network.

We have internal users who tend to be engineering teams, operational teams, capacity planning teams, and provisioning teams. The main stakeholder is capacity planning. They are looking at our network to ensure that it runs efficiently, i.e., isn't congested or overloaded. They tend to be the main users of the current clusters. Moving forward, we have a customer-facing cluster, which will be customers who buy services from us, but that hasn't been implemented yet.

SevOne's collection abilities cover multiple vendors' equipment, and the scalability in this regard is important to us. When we make changes to our environment, such as the addition of new devices from a new vendor, SevOne very quickly upgrades the system to meet our requirements. They are quite flexible and whatever we have, they try to accommodate. I have never heard them say that they could not do something. Rather, if something is not available then we submit a request for it to be supported.

Scalability really depends on the license. I think that they have a per-device license but this is not what we chose. We opted to purchase the license on a per-object basis, which is why it is difficult for us to scale. We are continuously monitoring the system to ensure that we don't exceed our number of licenses. If we had a per-device license then it would save some unnecessary tasks, and we could use it fully if there were no license limits.

We primarily have two types of users. There are those who add and monitor devices, and then simpler users that only view the reports. Anyone from our technology department may need to monitor bandwidth, or CPU usage, or another resource, which is something that they can request access for. 

At this time, it is mainly the network operations team that handles troubleshooting, and our team, which is in charge of proactive updates. Between our two groups, there are 261 users.

Over time, our usage will increase, albeit slowly. We have to be careful that the SevOne functionality does not overlap with our other tools because we don't want to duplicate it unnecessarily.

It's very scalable, especially if you are going with a virtual environment. It's just a matter of deploying the collectors where you need them and quickly discovering devices.

We monitor around 7800 network devices, which includes routers, switches, wireless controllers, et cetera. In addition, we monitor about 21,000 access points.

As far as administration of the tool, we have three engineers who concentrate on the various network types to make recommendations on the KPIs and the monitoring. They also handle the onboarding of devices and configuring of alert policies.

I bought SevOne because it scales. The rules are very clear for what you want to collect and how frequently, and you dimension it accordingly. It just scales. We have no issue with that whatsoever.

There are several hundred users using it. We predominantly have tier 1 operations people, but the majority would be what we class as tier 2 network engineers so that they're doing an operations role, but in a second-level capacity, and they would be using the tool directly. Then the majority of the rest of the audience are customers who are checking the performance stats because we're providing reports to them of utilization on their links, various other utilization metrics, and availability performance metrics to them as part of the managed services we offer to them. There are several thousand customers.

I have one team that looks after it, they have six people who don't only exclusively look after SevOne. They look after a whole bunch of monitoring and management tools. So we have one staff member and a backup. It's essentially two people, but they're on other apps as well. So we have a very lean number of people working on the tool.

We have licensed it for all the usage we need across Spark. It's already fully deployed at the moment for everything that we need in our organization, so it wouldn't expand much beyond that.

This product is eminently scalable. It is a matter of compute resources and licenses.

We have between 25 and 30 people who use SevOne on the front end. Those are the other operations teams and their engineering counterparts. 

I am in the process of publishing some dashboards for some other parts of the organization, such as the retail support center and the media teams, so our usage is going to expand. These are not going to be power users but rather, they are going to be limited to a specific dashboard and a specific set of elements, as opposed to being able to look at the entire network. 

Counting those people, that is going to be an extra 20 users. Then, when the NOC gets integrated, we will probably be up to more than 50 users.

It is slowly but surely being implemented on each network in the company, and becoming the performance front end for each of these networks. We are a cell phone provider, we are a cell service provider, we are a cable television provider, and we are an internet provider. As such, we have many different customer-facing networks nationwide, and all of our networks except maybe the one used for radio broadcasting will end up using it. Through this, the user base is expanding.

The main reasons for the expansion are that it is so intuitive and accessible, and I found it just takes the pressure off me as an operations manager to check on these things for people when they can check for themselves, and see in real-time that the network is fine.

Scalability is great, amazing.

It's very easy to scale because you just add a peer. It's been the easiest to grow. Internally, that is one of the selling points to other teams. If we need to grow with a new appliance peer, the turnaround is very fast.

We have more than 1,000 users because all the network engineers that have LDAP access are automatically integrated into SevOne. Other users' roles include technical account managers who manage the relationships with the customers whose infrastructure we monitor. We also have internal security teams that monitor the security equipment with SevOne, and network management systems engineers who use SevOne to troubleshoot problems in a network.

We use the solution for a lot of our large customers, to monitor their infrastructures for them. We use it to monitor almost every network asset in our company as well. We use it extensively.

In terms of maintenance of the solution, for the last five years, I have been the primary person responsible. SevOne allows me to do my work, which would normally take about five people to do. I am able to do it very well with all the help that I get from SevOne support.

Given the peer-to-peer architecture, scalability is outstanding. You can both vertically and horizontally scale. We have approximately 60,000 network devices.

We have three or four people in the company who work with SevOne in at least a limited fashion. I am an architect and there are two advanced SevOne developers. We don't manage only SevOne but other products, as well. There is nobody who is entirely dedicated to managing SevOne.

It is scalable, absolutely. The VM was initially built with a small number of resources, and we didn't upgrade those resources for four or five years. But our devices and objects had grown a lot. It is definitely scalable in that sense.

At the moment it's just our engineering team, about five of us, who are using it, but we use it very extensively. In the future, we are planning to give access to the TAC team so that they can have a monitoring dashboard as well. We will probably have 20 users in the future.

We also plan on expanding our usage. In the past, we had only an instance in one of our data centers. But we have a second data center for our applications and if we had to use that data center we would be virtually blind. I believe we have already obtained a license to build a SevOne instance in our second data center. We are struggling with support in getting that built up.

There are no issues regarding scalability. You can scale horizontally as many as you want. We are able to deploy across customers. We have a regional deployment model. For one of our customers we have deployed it on their cloud so that they can keep it close to their customers and have better performance.

Scalability has been good. It apparently has the ability to scale very broadly as long as you have the resources to deploy more instances of the tool, it is very nice on that front. The scalability is good.

We have around 30 users. Some of the users are in network operations and network engineering. Obviously, the network management team and some management use it to be able to get their visibility into how the network looks.

We have essentially two people managing the environment and they're both in the network management team. It eats up a fair amount of their time in order to really take advantage of what the tool can do.

It is used pretty extensively for the gear that we have deployed it on. We bought it for the monitoring. There are plans to expand, to include more of our network gear in the tool. I have no idea of the timeline, but I would say it's used pretty extensively. The gear that is modeled on there is only mounted on SevOne. We've taken off of all of our other monitoring to get down to a single pane of glass.

All the stakeholders in the organization are using it.

We have two administrators for the solution who are responsible for the application. 

Scalability seems to be incredible. We're adding peers one after another. We got the wifi solution and then we just added four new peers, two on the east coast, two on the west coast of the United States. We just order more peers and get them built. SevOne sends us the OVA files. We install it, we open up a case of SevOne. They help us bring it into the cluster. And boom, we've got another whole peer ready for another 1000, 2000 devices. So its expandability is very nice, much better than OpenView and the other things I worked on.

We are one of SevOne's large appliance base customers, and we have not had any issues so far.

It is extremely scalable. We're managing almost 8,000 devices, and if we need to add 8,000 more devices, we just need to add a commensurate number of peers to handle that load. It is horizontally scalable, which is nice.

My company has 500 users for the solution.

You can add as many devices as you want, but I think you need to buy more licenses to add more devices. But scalability is not an issue. We have seven to eight clients and we monitor more than a thousand devices for each one.

There are no new clients in the pipeline, but if another comes along, we will definitely recommend SevOne to them.

This product is very scalable, especially if it's just a matter of growing the network. You add more devices, make sure your licensing is in check, and the system ingests it as that equipment is green-lighted.

If you're changing technology, adding layers upon which you want them to monitor, it is still scalable, although it takes a little bit more work.

We have approximately two dozen users in the organization.

Yes, but this was caused by special and very uncommon expectations from our side.

Together with SevOne, we implemented the solution which allows us to automatically add any new network device that is added to our external (independent from SevOne) database.

We use the SevOne API to add those devices and interfaces to SevOne. In case of devices with a huge number of interfaces, more than 100, SevOne was not able to load them into its own database.

SevOne recommended an upgrade to a later version to resolve this limitation.

We just scaled it up a month ago because we were reaching some limits. It is quite scalable. It took a day to scale it up with the new appliances that were delivered. It is quite easy to scale.

We are monitoring 886 devices. That is infrastructure monitoring. There are more devices that we still want to monitor. Our plan is to reach 1,300.

No issues with scalability – that’s what's sweet about this product, unlike Tivoli with which he did have scalability issues. SevOne is peer-to-peer so you just add another PAS to the cluster. It's like lots of hands making light work – no problems scaling.

Scalability is just a matter of adding new appliances to the cluster if needed.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

We did not have any scalability issues.

It's very scaleable, as you just add an appliance and it's immediately available to users. Also, its integration with other appliances is very quick and transparent to end users. We started with only one, and have grown over time to more than 15 appliances very quickly.

We still have the original server form and we have not had to install much additional hardware, except just to add teams to the server.

No.

I have not encountered any issues with scalability.

So far the product has scaled to our needs. We broke it early on but the past few years it has scaled to our needs.

One of the key benefits of the product is its ability to scale. There were no issues with regards to scalability. You can add more licenses or more SevOne appliances into your cluster as needed.

It has scaled to our needs; if you need more you add an appliance and off you go.

No

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

No problems here. Regarding reports and alerts, everything is good in this tool. The only thing we faced is SNMP traps, like snoozing the servers for a specific time, which is a maintenance mode issue.

No problems.

No.

No issues encountered.

There were no issues with the scalability.

I didn't have any issues with scaling it.

Yes, but it is according licensing.