groundcover Reviews

Very easy setup and fully customizable retention without affecting cost as it runs on your own infrastructure

Comments: Very good, we have been with them since the beginning of 2023 and after experiencing the likes of DataDog, Dynatrace and Instana they have been a breath of fresh air with VERY predictable and reasonable pricing and a support team that is very eager to help out when you need them. Even going above and beyond and advising on how to use the data that is gathered by them inside your infrastructure and notifying you on how future changes might affect the usage of that raw data from the deployed databases.

Pros:

Easy setup, simple pricing model no hidden fees. Full control over retention without affecting cost. Mostly used eBPF integrations out of the box. Simple UI that gets directly to the point.

Cons:

Some eBPF integrations not yet available

Alternatives Considered: Datadog, IBM Instana, Dynatrace, New Relic and Honeycomb

Reasons for Switching to groundcover: Simple and reliable pricing structure and they delivered on their eBPF zero-instrumentation promise for most of the services and provided a very attractive open-source alternative (oTEL) for the things that are not covered by eBPF.

Amazing observability platform!

Pros:

Groundcover is so simple to implement and use! we built our obsevability around it and are very happy with it! logs ,metrics, dashboard - everything! the pricing is great and simple and their slack community and tech team is very responsive and helpful! we use it on a daily basis and it has proved itself as the best solution for a startup in our size!

Cons:

more slice and dices option will be great and maybe additional dashboards and templates , but the product keeps improving and those features are already showing up.

Alternatives Considered: Datadog, Logz.io, Elastic Observability and Coralogix

Reasons for Choosing groundcover: costs, performance, ease of management and usage.

Switched From: Elastic Suite

Reasons for Switching to groundcover: costs, performance, ease of management and usage and support

Product has long onboarding time

Pros:

A lot of important data is exposed, this helps a lot to debug our production

Cons:

As a new user i find it hard to get into all of the abilities i have in groundcover

Groundcover: zero effort observability

Comments: We utilize Groundcover for our infrastructure's observability. The cost-benefit tradeoff has been remarkable. With minimal effort, we've gained a comprehensive understanding of our infrastructure's inner workings, significantly enhancing our knowledge of the cluster's activities. Additionally, we've configured security-related alerts using NGINX logs as the data source, further bolstering our monitoring capabilities.

Pros:

Groundcover has significantly impacted our small team, offering immediate insights into our EKS cluster within just 10 minutes. Its GitOps-compatible configuration seamlessly integrates into our workflow. The support via the Slack channel is outstanding, with the team being highly responsive and patient, consistently providing replies in under an hour.

Cons:

The current dashboards and alerts in Groundcover, which utilize an embedded Grafana, certainly deliver impressive functionalities. However, exploring a unique approach developed by Groundcover itself could potentially improve the product. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Alternatives Considered: Sentry and Datadog

Reasons for Switching to groundcover: Ease of use, configuration and installation. Convenient pricing model.

Amazing Product

Comments: Amazing experience from the UI to the UX, very recommended

Pros:

Liked how native groundcover is with EKS, can be installed in a couple of minutes and provides a full observability platform. It’s also low on resources and take an a minimal additional footprint on the infrastructure.

Cons:

groundcover’s bread and butter is still K8s. for outside K8s they support a lot of intergrations but the experience is not as immediate as inside out EKS environment

Groundcover - A Premier Observability Solution

Comments: Overall, my experience with Groundcover has been extremely positive. It has revolutionized the way I approach system monitoring and analytics. The depth of insights and the ease of uncovering critical data points have significantly improved the efficiency of our operations.

Pros:

My experience with Groundcover has been overwhelmingly positive, primarily due to its exceptional efficiency and clarity in observability. The user interface stands out with its intuitive design, making navigation and data interpretation seamless. The real-time data monitoring and analytics capabilities are top-notch, providing valuable insights into system performance with remarkable accuracy.

Cons:

One area where Groundcover falls short is in its provision of node-specific views. While it excels in overall system observability, the solution lacks the granularity needed for detailed analysis of individual nodes. This limitation can be a significant drawback for complex systems where pinpointing issues at the node level is crucial.

Comprehensive and Efficient Monitoring with groundcover

Comments: groundcover offers an impressive experience from the user interface to the user experience. It stands out for its eBPF-powered technology, allowing comprehensive observability in modern production environments without compromising cost, granularity, or scale. The platform's ease of use and customer support are highly rated, adding to its overall appeal as a reliable monitoring solution

Pros:

The most standout aspect of groundcover is its compatibility and native integration with EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Service), which enables rapid installation and provides a complete observability platform. It's particularly efficient in terms of resource usage, maintaining a minimal footprint on the infrastructure.

Cons:

Groundcover thrives in Kubernetes (K8s) environments, delivering top-notch performance. While it may not be as immediate in non-EKS settings, it still supports various integrations.

Groundcover is one of the kind

Pros:

We liked the idea of hosting data in our cloud account and at the same time having the ability to use the service as SaaS. We also liked the ability to have fully managed observability service as such a low cost.

Cons:

groundcover services are still maturing. We had to request couple of features that do not exist yet.

Alternatives Considered: Grafana, Amazon CloudWatch, Prometheus and LOKI

Best APM solution that just works

Comments: It was very refreshing experience to setup such tool so quickly and get value out of it even quicker. Free plan is perfect for evaluation, even month-long, as the only limitation is a number of seats.

Pros:

It is super easy to install (installer is clever enough to ask about kubernetes node taints required to be able to provision all nodes), just few steps in small cli tool. All the data is aggregated and displayed in meaningful way right at the front page, no need to spend hours learning documentation on how setup and use the tool. Very intuitive tool, focused on providing insight into health / state of k8s cluster and services and it does it really well. Historical data (events, logs, traces, metrics) allows you to quickly figure out issues that happened last night leaving no room for guess-work.

Cons:

At this point it is missing eBPF support for MSSQL, navigating through distributed traces could be improved (group them by transaction type and aggregate based on that).

Tool for observability

Comments: Very good - I doesn't have to care about things like grafana or prometheus

Pros:

* easy to setup * monitor all HTTP traffic * nice dashboard

Cons:

* missing filtering on http traces * network traces should have view where one column shot "Host" header

Groundcover review

Pros:

Easy to navigate and search logs. Shows good metrics pods-wise

Cons:

Hard to find the details of a specific log

Observability made easy

Pros:

The ease of deployment, the platform, availability of majority of the features. And constant feature releases.

Cons:

Nothing as such. The team is constantly improving and bringing in new features.

Amazing visibility across all of our cluster

Pros:

I liked the visibility I have as a developer to investigate real-life issues across all of our customers' deployments. With GroundCover we're able to proactively find issues in our customers' environments, and fix them before they affect them.

Cons:

Our customers are divided into multiple different clusters, and the view in GroundCover is per cluster - so we need to move between clusters to see the whole scope of the issue (although most of the time looking at one of the clusters is enough to identify issues). I hope they'll add the ability to aggregate all clusters in some view in the future.

Great tooling

Pros:

It is pretty easy and fast to setuo, and the UI is simple and understandable, but feature-rich.

Cons:

The default setup had some stability issues at first, but the groundcover team was very helpful to solve them.

Easy to debug , great UI

Pros:

Very easy to see complicated data. See log trace with great filter feature.

Cons:

In first look it look cheap product, but after digging in it very compact and powerfull.

Very good observability on your network assets

Pros:

Run fast in high scale . gives you a very good and deep insights for your apps and network / resources

Cons:

don't have any yet I really like your product - I came from Nokia and we implement something similar but this is by far better

Really nice product

Pros:

Simple easy to understand UX which gives quick insights

Cons:

I haven't experienced any issues yet on groundcover

Great product

Pros:

Makes work much easier. For example, finding logs.

Cons:

Takes some time getting used to it but after a while its fine.