Data Center Real-User Monitoring (DCRUM), discontinued vs. Reliability Toolkit

Dynatrace Network Application Monitoring (NAM), formerly DCRUM, has improved greatly compared to when it was DCRUM; however, it still needs a lot of improvement in end-to-end flow capture with regards to network monitoring. Its alerting and integration capabilities are very good and easy to use. But it still needs a lot of tweaking in usability.

Incentivized

• Dynatrace Network Application Monitoring (NAM), formerly DCRUM, is very useful to find the network packet flow across applications
• It shows the application behavior in terms of end-user performance
• It integrates very well with other Dynatrace components

Incentivized

• Its configuration requires a lot of technical and business knowledge to drive monitoring expectations to dashboards.
• DCRUM needs a robust monitoring architecture to store, analyze and visualize all collected data.
• DCRUM can't monitor the latest Microsoft Exchange versions.

Best of breed.

The only thing missing for a 10, would be if they texted or called you back.

Nagios can't trace real user transactions from a front-end tier through a backend-tier,;with Nagios you only can monitor server availability and hardware issues. Riverbed is commonly used to determine networking issues without considering real user transactions impact on an application stack.

• It has reduced the number of war rooms as well as the number of people involved to address issues.
• It helps in utilization trending for network capacity.
• It has prevented poor solutions from hitting production.
• When the various business units launch own initiatives such as third party tools or new platforms, it's become extremly easy to detect.
• The reports help in the field of continuous improvement as any changes are immediately discovered and can be compared to history. Deviations from what you have decided as a tolerance corridor can be used to trigger alarms, both positive and negative.