groundcover

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