Skip to main content

Why Traditional APM Tools Are Insufficient for Modern Enterprise Applications

Navin Israni
Arkenea

APM tools are your window into your application's performance — its capacity and levels of service. These tools help admins conduct regular health checks on the app so they can tell the state of the app without any ambiguity.

Any application is made up of its layers and its subsystems — the servers, the virtualization layers, the dependencies, and its components. The purpose of such tools has traditionally been to monitor the performance of all the subsystems.

A traditional approach to APM involved the use of arbitrary sampling strategies, algorithm-based data completion, and a fair bit of prediction to analyze the root cause. So, the agents had to come up with a hypothesis of why things were wrong and devise a sampling strategy to test that theory. Any data gaps were predictively filled by algorithms.

Automation is one of the many ways that founders can scale their business. As organizations grow, their automated processes will only generate more data, not less. As automation seeps into every facet of the digital enterprise, the applications interfacing organizations with their audience generate large swathes of raw, unsampled data.

Traditional APM tools are now struggling due to the mismatch between their specifications and expectations.

Modern application architectures are multi-faceted; they contain hybrid components across a variety of on-premise and cloud applications. Modern enterprises often generate data in silos with each outflow having its own data structure. This data comes from several tools over different periods of time.

Such diversity in sources, structure, and formats present unique challenges for traditional enterprise tools.

1. Inability to handle massive, multi-dimensional data

As discussed before, modern applications are not atomic; they are constituent of several components and subsystems all of which contribute to its overall performance. 

Each subsystem can produce several terabytes of data. Such scale of data brings forth at least a few problems with the earlier-generation APM tools:

■ The efficient storage of and access to this data is a peculiar challenge.

■ Real-time analysis of this data on the mammoth-scale is an even bigger challenge for traditional APM tools.

■ Often the data may be multiple types of data sources — in flat files, structured query-based databases, or even complete systems of their own with API-based access.

2. Propagation of fragmentation into APM tools

Often, we see new tools for each functional area even within the same data center. This fuels silo creation as segregated teams support individual tools for managing the server, network, storage, and virtual layers. 

A count of anywhere between 6 to 10 tools would not be uncommon. Each of these proprietary tools may come with vendor lock-in, forcing companies to continue using them with restrictions or pay more when the usage increases.

This is not ideal for enterprises as most modern applications are dynamic and interdependent in nature. For example, as user-base increases, a single business request to increase capacity will mean synchronous updating and coordination among silos for databases, servers, networks, and virtual layers.

At the intersection of these functional areas, agents do the job of coordinating the data and passing on the configurations. Without a cohesive plan to manage these agents (automated or manual), it becomes difficult to collectively address issues to optimize their efficiency. 

Due to the fragmentation in tools, other issues like long-term licensing come to surface and companies have to keep paying for these tools over the long term. One possible solution is to outsource product development. This way companies can target multiple functionalities with a single custom-developed app and finite vendor contracts.

3. Security risks during seasonal spikes

To proactively identify problems, these tools rely on detecting anomalies in data sources that are infrastructure-centric. This would typically include log files, memory metrics, CPU usage, and so on. 

If there are seasonal spikes, such as massive holiday sales like Black Friday, the admins would be flooded with spikes across the board. Hiding an attack in between these spikes becomes easier as most traditional APM tools can't differentiate between these spikes from distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks.

4. Difficulty in root-cause analysis

Agents can stitch together data from various systems to identify root cause of major problems. To detect anomalies, agents identify patterns and then use queries to confirm their assumptions of a diagnosis.

Because of human involvement in the diagnosis process, there is a strong possibility of selection/sampling bias being introduced in the process.

Also, these analyses are estimates at best as they rely on testing a hypothesis.

An accurate, tools-agnostic analysis of the root cause requires not only identifying anomalies but patterns of these aberrations over time. This is where traditional APM tools fall short and predictive analysis tools truly shine.

Final Words

Traditional APM tools lack the capacity to handle the scale of data being generated by modern applications. Also, these applications generally occupy status of legacy apps in enterprises, which makes replacing them even more difficult.

So, while management is likely to see them as roadblocks, removing these legacy apps completely from the enterprise would mean ripping the band-aid off. It is a hard decision to make and one that requires a fair bit of convincing and strategy.

This might look like hard work, but it is better than letting these roadblocks continue to slow your processes down. It is important to take action before the damage becomes critical.

Navin Israni is a Senior Content Writer at Arkenea

Hot Topics

The Latest

AI observability serves several roles across an organization. AI engineers use it to build, evaluate, and improve AI systems. SREs use it to operate those systems reliably and efficiently in production, including managing their cost. Leaders need it to connect AI behavior and operational performance to business outcomes. The common need is a clear understanding of whether AI systems are delivering the intended result ...

Part 4 outlines the challenges enterprise face when adopting AI observability. The main challenge is that AI complexity compounds at every stage of maturity. LLM-based applications introduce new behavior, dependencies, and quality considerations, while Agentic AI adds further failure modes as systems make decisions and take actions ...

Part 3 reports on the current state of AI observability. Most experts agree: enterprises are moving faster with AI than they are with the operational discipline needed to run it safely ...

When discussing AI Observability, one of the first questions that arises: Is this just an extension of traditional observability or is this a whole new type of tool? Part 2 compares traditional observability with AI observability ...

In this extensive 14-part series that will post over the next three weeks, experts across observability and AI will provide insight and opinions on the need for AI Observability, the challenges, the benefits, the current state, and predictions for the future ...

Amid rising complexity, organizations are moving quickly toward agent-driven operations: AgenticOps, according to The Impact of Agentic AI on Network Operations, a new report from Cisco ...

AI, automation, and enterprise software give organizations an extraordinary amount of leverage. Work that once required hours can happen in minutes. Information buried across systems can be analyzed almost instantly. Complex workflows can be coordinated across teams with far less manual intervention. That leverage creates a temptation to start with the technology ...

Everyone wants to talk about models. Compute clusters. Benchmark scores that climb a fraction of a point and make headlines anyway. It's an easy conversation to have because it's measurable. But it's also increasingly beside the point ...

For more than a decade, the default infrastructure play has been simple. Move more workloads to the cloud, retire on-premises gear and treat the data center as a cost to shrink. That logic held while public cloud offered near-limitless capacity at predictable prices, and AI demand is now testing both halves of that assumption ...

Most enterprise IT leaders can tell you exactly how many applications are running across their organization. They can surface a dashboard showing telecom spend by region, pull a report on SaaS license utilization, or call up a real-time view of mobile device inventory. The data is there, and IT leaders have largely delivered on the promise of visibility. Yet, in most organizations, that visibility has not translated into business value ...

Why Traditional APM Tools Are Insufficient for Modern Enterprise Applications

Navin Israni
Arkenea

APM tools are your window into your application's performance — its capacity and levels of service. These tools help admins conduct regular health checks on the app so they can tell the state of the app without any ambiguity.

Any application is made up of its layers and its subsystems — the servers, the virtualization layers, the dependencies, and its components. The purpose of such tools has traditionally been to monitor the performance of all the subsystems.

A traditional approach to APM involved the use of arbitrary sampling strategies, algorithm-based data completion, and a fair bit of prediction to analyze the root cause. So, the agents had to come up with a hypothesis of why things were wrong and devise a sampling strategy to test that theory. Any data gaps were predictively filled by algorithms.

Automation is one of the many ways that founders can scale their business. As organizations grow, their automated processes will only generate more data, not less. As automation seeps into every facet of the digital enterprise, the applications interfacing organizations with their audience generate large swathes of raw, unsampled data.

Traditional APM tools are now struggling due to the mismatch between their specifications and expectations.

Modern application architectures are multi-faceted; they contain hybrid components across a variety of on-premise and cloud applications. Modern enterprises often generate data in silos with each outflow having its own data structure. This data comes from several tools over different periods of time.

Such diversity in sources, structure, and formats present unique challenges for traditional enterprise tools.

1. Inability to handle massive, multi-dimensional data

As discussed before, modern applications are not atomic; they are constituent of several components and subsystems all of which contribute to its overall performance. 

Each subsystem can produce several terabytes of data. Such scale of data brings forth at least a few problems with the earlier-generation APM tools:

■ The efficient storage of and access to this data is a peculiar challenge.

■ Real-time analysis of this data on the mammoth-scale is an even bigger challenge for traditional APM tools.

■ Often the data may be multiple types of data sources — in flat files, structured query-based databases, or even complete systems of their own with API-based access.

2. Propagation of fragmentation into APM tools

Often, we see new tools for each functional area even within the same data center. This fuels silo creation as segregated teams support individual tools for managing the server, network, storage, and virtual layers. 

A count of anywhere between 6 to 10 tools would not be uncommon. Each of these proprietary tools may come with vendor lock-in, forcing companies to continue using them with restrictions or pay more when the usage increases.

This is not ideal for enterprises as most modern applications are dynamic and interdependent in nature. For example, as user-base increases, a single business request to increase capacity will mean synchronous updating and coordination among silos for databases, servers, networks, and virtual layers.

At the intersection of these functional areas, agents do the job of coordinating the data and passing on the configurations. Without a cohesive plan to manage these agents (automated or manual), it becomes difficult to collectively address issues to optimize their efficiency. 

Due to the fragmentation in tools, other issues like long-term licensing come to surface and companies have to keep paying for these tools over the long term. One possible solution is to outsource product development. This way companies can target multiple functionalities with a single custom-developed app and finite vendor contracts.

3. Security risks during seasonal spikes

To proactively identify problems, these tools rely on detecting anomalies in data sources that are infrastructure-centric. This would typically include log files, memory metrics, CPU usage, and so on. 

If there are seasonal spikes, such as massive holiday sales like Black Friday, the admins would be flooded with spikes across the board. Hiding an attack in between these spikes becomes easier as most traditional APM tools can't differentiate between these spikes from distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks.

4. Difficulty in root-cause analysis

Agents can stitch together data from various systems to identify root cause of major problems. To detect anomalies, agents identify patterns and then use queries to confirm their assumptions of a diagnosis.

Because of human involvement in the diagnosis process, there is a strong possibility of selection/sampling bias being introduced in the process.

Also, these analyses are estimates at best as they rely on testing a hypothesis.

An accurate, tools-agnostic analysis of the root cause requires not only identifying anomalies but patterns of these aberrations over time. This is where traditional APM tools fall short and predictive analysis tools truly shine.

Final Words

Traditional APM tools lack the capacity to handle the scale of data being generated by modern applications. Also, these applications generally occupy status of legacy apps in enterprises, which makes replacing them even more difficult.

So, while management is likely to see them as roadblocks, removing these legacy apps completely from the enterprise would mean ripping the band-aid off. It is a hard decision to make and one that requires a fair bit of convincing and strategy.

This might look like hard work, but it is better than letting these roadblocks continue to slow your processes down. It is important to take action before the damage becomes critical.

Navin Israni is a Senior Content Writer at Arkenea

Hot Topics

The Latest

AI observability serves several roles across an organization. AI engineers use it to build, evaluate, and improve AI systems. SREs use it to operate those systems reliably and efficiently in production, including managing their cost. Leaders need it to connect AI behavior and operational performance to business outcomes. The common need is a clear understanding of whether AI systems are delivering the intended result ...

Part 4 outlines the challenges enterprise face when adopting AI observability. The main challenge is that AI complexity compounds at every stage of maturity. LLM-based applications introduce new behavior, dependencies, and quality considerations, while Agentic AI adds further failure modes as systems make decisions and take actions ...

Part 3 reports on the current state of AI observability. Most experts agree: enterprises are moving faster with AI than they are with the operational discipline needed to run it safely ...

When discussing AI Observability, one of the first questions that arises: Is this just an extension of traditional observability or is this a whole new type of tool? Part 2 compares traditional observability with AI observability ...

In this extensive 14-part series that will post over the next three weeks, experts across observability and AI will provide insight and opinions on the need for AI Observability, the challenges, the benefits, the current state, and predictions for the future ...

Amid rising complexity, organizations are moving quickly toward agent-driven operations: AgenticOps, according to The Impact of Agentic AI on Network Operations, a new report from Cisco ...

AI, automation, and enterprise software give organizations an extraordinary amount of leverage. Work that once required hours can happen in minutes. Information buried across systems can be analyzed almost instantly. Complex workflows can be coordinated across teams with far less manual intervention. That leverage creates a temptation to start with the technology ...

Everyone wants to talk about models. Compute clusters. Benchmark scores that climb a fraction of a point and make headlines anyway. It's an easy conversation to have because it's measurable. But it's also increasingly beside the point ...

For more than a decade, the default infrastructure play has been simple. Move more workloads to the cloud, retire on-premises gear and treat the data center as a cost to shrink. That logic held while public cloud offered near-limitless capacity at predictable prices, and AI demand is now testing both halves of that assumption ...

Most enterprise IT leaders can tell you exactly how many applications are running across their organization. They can surface a dashboard showing telecom spend by region, pull a report on SaaS license utilization, or call up a real-time view of mobile device inventory. The data is there, and IT leaders have largely delivered on the promise of visibility. Yet, in most organizations, that visibility has not translated into business value ...