Skip to main content

AIOps Has a Data(Ops) Problem

Andy Thurai
The Field CTO

Modern complex systems are easy to develop and deploy but extremely difficult to observe. Their IT Ops data gets very messy. If you have ever worked with modern Ops teams, you will know this. There are multiple issues with data, from collection to processing to storage to getting proper insights at the right time. I will try to group and simplify them as much as possible and suggest possible solutions to do it right.

Data Volume

Netflix, Uber, and most other digital giants claim to make thousands of "daily production changes." That is the power of agile development processes. But that is a nightmare for Ops teams. As Ops gurus Gene Kim and Kevin Behr point out in their famous book The Visible Ops Handbook, 80% of unplanned outages are due to ill-planned changes. Changes can be either to application/services or to infrastructure. If 80% of unplanned outages are caused by changes, and if thousands of daily production changes happen regularly, you have no option but to closely monitor any changes to your entire application stack.

But the problem with that is the data volume. Monitoring a decent-sized modern application can produce upwards of terabytes monthly. A complex production application would run on hundreds (or even thousands) of containers, and potentially multiple Kubernetes clusters, and possibly in multi-cloud locations to serve multiple requests per second.


Source: medium.com

Data Collection

There are two issues with data collection. The first is proper instrumentation. It sounds easier than it is. The entire observability, monitoring, and AIOps eco-system depend on properly instrumenting your observable sources. If your systems, devices, services, and infrastructure is not properly instrumented, then you will have data blind spots. No matter how much data you collect from certain areas, if you do not have a holistic view of all the telemetry components, you will be getting a partial view of any system. Obviously, the instrumentation depends mostly on developers.

The second issue is integration. As any AIOps vendor will tell you, this probably is the most difficult part to get your AIOps solution going. The more input from varying telemetry sources, the better the insights will be. Any good AIOps solutions will be able to integrate easily with the basic golden telemetry — logs, metrics, and traces. In addition, integrating with notification systems, and maybe event streams (such as Kafka, etc.), is useful as well. However, I quite often see major enterprises struggling a lot to integrate the AIOps solutions with their existing enterprise systems.

In particular, the need to integrate with several existing enterprise systems such as ITOM, ITSM, CMDBs, and collaboration/service tools can make it even more difficult. An easier way to solve this is to either automate or produce cookie-cutter integrations that can speed up the most time-consuming integration processes.

Data Storage, Transport, and Security

Assuming you process the data at the source, such as in the cloud where it was created, this is not an issue. However, if the data either needs to be transported or stored, it can get quite expensive over time. First, most clouds will charge for data egress, and some clouds charge for data ingress. Assuming your AIOps is not at source, then this cost needs to be taken into consideration as well. Plus, if the data needs to be stored in full fidelity for analysis later, then the costs can be high. For example, Uber built their own cloud-native time-series database M3 to store metrics information, reducing their storage costs by 90%, which is huge when you have large volumes of data.

Data Processing

This is probably the most difficult problem in the data pipeline for AIOps, especially because Ops data comes in multiple formats — some structured, some unstructured, and some semi-structured. In addition, data delivery can also come in different modes and sizes — streaming, batch, bulk queries, notifications/events. The first issue with data preparation involves doing DataOps; integrity checks, data cleansing, transforming, and shaping the data (aggregating, filtering, sorting) needs to be automated to be easily consumed by AIOps systems.

Often, the data inadvertently includes "dirty data." It could be either missing information, inconsistent information, errors, omissions, or even bias information. Particularly because most AIOps systems use machine learning on datasets, having dirty data can skew the results. It is estimated that an average of 10-20% of the raw data can have deficiencies and need to be made machine-learning ready.

The secondary issue is often that the data lacks application or service context. Operations data is just a piece of a machine or human-generated information. Without context, it will not make any sense and will not give insight as to what is happening in the big picture. To get a deeper understanding, the data should be enriched in real-time with context from other systems and events. It is particularly painful if code needs to be written for every step; for example, a new type of transformation would need a new set of code, etc. Creating, testing, and maintaining that code for every data set is nearly impossible and becomes a nightmare when the number of data connectors grows.

Essentially, building a data pipeline or DataOps is key for any effective AIOps solution. Plus, data also needs to be enriched with contextual information. An isolated incident creating a service ticket will create too much service ticket volume. Instead, a good system should consolidate the tickets and enrich the ticket with additional information, such as corresponding events, correlated incidents, etc., to help support personal resolve issues quickly.

DataOps Can Improve the AIOps Data Pipeline

Both during POCs and productionalization of AIOps, almost all enterprises struggle mightily with streamlining and smoothening the data pipeline for AIOps. I see a major need for enterprise-grade tools in this area. It is a very rough, unorganized, time-consuming, trial and error, and costly process to get this right.

By using self-service automation tools, the data pipeline can be built, experimented with, automated, and put into production by operations teams instead of depending on costly data engineers, data scientists, and database experts. This DevOps revolution to the AIOps pipeline can reduce the dependencies on costly resources and reduce the time to real operational improvement.

Given the complexity of integration, data processing, and data dependency to get the right data to the AIOps to make it more efficient, unless this is fixed, AIOps is not going to produce dramatic results.

DataOps and self-service automation tools are the keys to solving the AIOps data problem. Some AIOps platforms have built-in data pipeline automation abilities to speed up the TTM and to maximize the ROI. Careful consideration of your specific problem needs to be mapped out against the AIOps tool-of-choice instead of picking one based on the popularity of the tool.

If AIOps is not given the right data, you will get garbage results. Fix the AIOps data pipeline first to get meaningful results.

Andy Thurai is Founder and Principal of The Field CTO

Hot Topics

The Latest

In live financial environments, capital markets software cannot pause for rebuilds. New capabilities are introduced as stacked technology layers to meet evolving demands while systems remain active, data keeps moving, and controls stay intact. AI is no exception, and its opportunities are significant: accelerated decision cycles, compressed manual workflows, and more effective operations across complex environments. The constraint isn't the models themselves, but the architectural environments they enter ...

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

AIOps Has a Data(Ops) Problem

Andy Thurai
The Field CTO

Modern complex systems are easy to develop and deploy but extremely difficult to observe. Their IT Ops data gets very messy. If you have ever worked with modern Ops teams, you will know this. There are multiple issues with data, from collection to processing to storage to getting proper insights at the right time. I will try to group and simplify them as much as possible and suggest possible solutions to do it right.

Data Volume

Netflix, Uber, and most other digital giants claim to make thousands of "daily production changes." That is the power of agile development processes. But that is a nightmare for Ops teams. As Ops gurus Gene Kim and Kevin Behr point out in their famous book The Visible Ops Handbook, 80% of unplanned outages are due to ill-planned changes. Changes can be either to application/services or to infrastructure. If 80% of unplanned outages are caused by changes, and if thousands of daily production changes happen regularly, you have no option but to closely monitor any changes to your entire application stack.

But the problem with that is the data volume. Monitoring a decent-sized modern application can produce upwards of terabytes monthly. A complex production application would run on hundreds (or even thousands) of containers, and potentially multiple Kubernetes clusters, and possibly in multi-cloud locations to serve multiple requests per second.


Source: medium.com

Data Collection

There are two issues with data collection. The first is proper instrumentation. It sounds easier than it is. The entire observability, monitoring, and AIOps eco-system depend on properly instrumenting your observable sources. If your systems, devices, services, and infrastructure is not properly instrumented, then you will have data blind spots. No matter how much data you collect from certain areas, if you do not have a holistic view of all the telemetry components, you will be getting a partial view of any system. Obviously, the instrumentation depends mostly on developers.

The second issue is integration. As any AIOps vendor will tell you, this probably is the most difficult part to get your AIOps solution going. The more input from varying telemetry sources, the better the insights will be. Any good AIOps solutions will be able to integrate easily with the basic golden telemetry — logs, metrics, and traces. In addition, integrating with notification systems, and maybe event streams (such as Kafka, etc.), is useful as well. However, I quite often see major enterprises struggling a lot to integrate the AIOps solutions with their existing enterprise systems.

In particular, the need to integrate with several existing enterprise systems such as ITOM, ITSM, CMDBs, and collaboration/service tools can make it even more difficult. An easier way to solve this is to either automate or produce cookie-cutter integrations that can speed up the most time-consuming integration processes.

Data Storage, Transport, and Security

Assuming you process the data at the source, such as in the cloud where it was created, this is not an issue. However, if the data either needs to be transported or stored, it can get quite expensive over time. First, most clouds will charge for data egress, and some clouds charge for data ingress. Assuming your AIOps is not at source, then this cost needs to be taken into consideration as well. Plus, if the data needs to be stored in full fidelity for analysis later, then the costs can be high. For example, Uber built their own cloud-native time-series database M3 to store metrics information, reducing their storage costs by 90%, which is huge when you have large volumes of data.

Data Processing

This is probably the most difficult problem in the data pipeline for AIOps, especially because Ops data comes in multiple formats — some structured, some unstructured, and some semi-structured. In addition, data delivery can also come in different modes and sizes — streaming, batch, bulk queries, notifications/events. The first issue with data preparation involves doing DataOps; integrity checks, data cleansing, transforming, and shaping the data (aggregating, filtering, sorting) needs to be automated to be easily consumed by AIOps systems.

Often, the data inadvertently includes "dirty data." It could be either missing information, inconsistent information, errors, omissions, or even bias information. Particularly because most AIOps systems use machine learning on datasets, having dirty data can skew the results. It is estimated that an average of 10-20% of the raw data can have deficiencies and need to be made machine-learning ready.

The secondary issue is often that the data lacks application or service context. Operations data is just a piece of a machine or human-generated information. Without context, it will not make any sense and will not give insight as to what is happening in the big picture. To get a deeper understanding, the data should be enriched in real-time with context from other systems and events. It is particularly painful if code needs to be written for every step; for example, a new type of transformation would need a new set of code, etc. Creating, testing, and maintaining that code for every data set is nearly impossible and becomes a nightmare when the number of data connectors grows.

Essentially, building a data pipeline or DataOps is key for any effective AIOps solution. Plus, data also needs to be enriched with contextual information. An isolated incident creating a service ticket will create too much service ticket volume. Instead, a good system should consolidate the tickets and enrich the ticket with additional information, such as corresponding events, correlated incidents, etc., to help support personal resolve issues quickly.

DataOps Can Improve the AIOps Data Pipeline

Both during POCs and productionalization of AIOps, almost all enterprises struggle mightily with streamlining and smoothening the data pipeline for AIOps. I see a major need for enterprise-grade tools in this area. It is a very rough, unorganized, time-consuming, trial and error, and costly process to get this right.

By using self-service automation tools, the data pipeline can be built, experimented with, automated, and put into production by operations teams instead of depending on costly data engineers, data scientists, and database experts. This DevOps revolution to the AIOps pipeline can reduce the dependencies on costly resources and reduce the time to real operational improvement.

Given the complexity of integration, data processing, and data dependency to get the right data to the AIOps to make it more efficient, unless this is fixed, AIOps is not going to produce dramatic results.

DataOps and self-service automation tools are the keys to solving the AIOps data problem. Some AIOps platforms have built-in data pipeline automation abilities to speed up the TTM and to maximize the ROI. Careful consideration of your specific problem needs to be mapped out against the AIOps tool-of-choice instead of picking one based on the popularity of the tool.

If AIOps is not given the right data, you will get garbage results. Fix the AIOps data pipeline first to get meaningful results.

Andy Thurai is Founder and Principal of The Field CTO

Hot Topics

The Latest

In live financial environments, capital markets software cannot pause for rebuilds. New capabilities are introduced as stacked technology layers to meet evolving demands while systems remain active, data keeps moving, and controls stay intact. AI is no exception, and its opportunities are significant: accelerated decision cycles, compressed manual workflows, and more effective operations across complex environments. The constraint isn't the models themselves, but the architectural environments they enter ...

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.