Why Your APM Solutions May Not Be “Cloud-Ready”

Julie Craig

Public Cloud provides a layer of abstraction between the functionality of a service and its delivery. Put simply, its functionality is unlocked by a credit card versus actual hands-on deployment. This is both a blessing and a curse.

Public Cloud customers are finding that, while Cloud services are easy to consume, they are not as easy to govern and manage. This abstraction layer means that traditional Application Performance Management (APM) solutions may not be as useful as they once were. As a result, many CIOs are finding it necessary to reevaluate management portfolios for Cloud-readiness.

Throughout most of 2011 and into 2012, Enterprise Management Associates’ (EMA) Application Management team conducted back to back research projects on APM for Cloud services. The research began during the Spring of 2011 with survey-based research assessing the impact of Cloud in all its flavors—public, private, and hybrid—on IT organizations.

After publishing the results of this study in August, we utilized the findings to formulate an EMA Radar Report, essentially an assessment of the solutions of eighteen leading APM vendors for “Cloud-readiness”. Released earlier this month (February, 2012), the findings are available for download at. www.emausa.com

The August report revealed that today’s companies are much further along in their Cloud deployments than most experts would have suspected. Nearly 85% are either already using private Cloud or are planning to do so within the next year. For SaaS that number is approximately 75%, for IaaS it is 65%, and for IaaS it stands at approximately 55%.

While these numbers are definitely interesting, to understand the true impact of Cloud it is necessary to take a look at how companies are using these services. After all, regardless of the underlying delivery mechanism, applications are still IT's primary deliverable, and application performance is the key measure of application quality. For this reason, the study also asked detailed questions about enterprise applications, architectures, and the role of Cloud in supporting production applications.

Table 1 shows adoption rates for a variety of deployment patterns for integrated applications. It illustrates the fact that transactions spanning heterogeneous hardware and software platforms are commonplace, definitely mainstream, and that those spanning on-premise and Cloud are not far behind.


Cloud-Ready APM

Patterns 1 and 2 relate to on-premise-hosted transactions. Patterns 3 and 4 relate to transactions touching the public Cloud, and, in the case of Pattern 4, integrations between multiple SaaS platforms.

While most of the APM solutions in the marketplace today were originally engineered to support primarily on-premise applications, many still do not support Patterns 1 and 2. They lack support for transactions spanning on-premise and mainframe or for those spanning Java and .NET.

APM solutions also vary widely in their levels of support for troubleshooting and root cause analysis. If the requirement is to quantify performance and availability, an application performance monitoring solution may suffice. However if there is an additional requirement for in-depth troubleshooting/root cause analysis support, monitoring solutions alone cannot provide adequate depth of visibility.

EMA’s APM taxonomy distinguishes performance monitoring from performance management for just this reason. In doing so, it makes the following distinctions:

Application Management Solutions: These solutions deliver visibility to and control of transactions, applications, and end-to-end services. The terminology covers a broad range of capabilities and products with visibility to application execution from a wide variety of instrumentation points.

Application Performance Monitoring and Application Performance Management are subsets of Application Management that focus on performance. The two classifications differ in their levels of support for troubleshooting and root cause analysis.

- Application Performance Monitoring solutions, such as End User Experience (EUE) management products, assess performance and availability.

- Application Performance Management (APM) solutions also monitor performance but support troubleshooting, problem determination, and root cause analysis as well. In other words, they have some level of visibility to the service model, which is the relationship between “top down” execution and “bottom up” infrastructure.

It is important to understand these distinctions because, although a wide variety of products are being marketed under the “APM” category, they are quite variable in terms of their capabilities. Monitoring solutions tend to be relatively inexpensive and may well be good choices if the requirement is simply to quantify performance and availability. Management capabilities do add cost, but that cost can quickly be recouped when automated troubleshooting replaces “all hands on deck” root cause analysis marathons.

Patterns 3 and 4 are examples of additional reasons why these distinctions are important. The adoption percentages for Pattern 3, for example, demonstrate that on-premise/public Cloud integrations are definitely mainstream deployment patterns. However, APM solutions vary significantly in the way they handle such transactions once they exit the enterprise IT ecosystem.

While virtually all have some depth of visibility to the on-premise segment of end-to-end execution, many see the public Cloud as a “black box”. They can monitor transactions to and from, and in doing so extrapolate “Cloud” performance. However they cannot penetrate beyond (or within) such integrations to a level that supports full-spectrum, tier-based reporting. Such reporting is essential for actually managing and troubleshooting complex applications.

This problem is even more prevalent in Pattern 4 deployments, since the majority of APM solutions have no visibility to the integration technology supporting SaaS to SaaS integrations. This is another case where off-premise tiers appear as a single black box as opposed to a series of steps with quantifications of execution time at each step.

Summary

What does this all this mean to CIO’s? One global bank is monitoring performance of customer applications from multiple locations worldwide. When they receive performance alerts, they manually triage to determine whether the problem is from all locations or a single location. They then do further manual triage to determine the actual problem source. Sound familiar? It should, because this is the same, quintessential problem-solving paradigm IT has utilized for eons—only now it is on a broader scale.

Cloud, particularly public Cloud, means that the underlying structure of transactions and applications becomes more opaque. Performance problems become more difficult to troubleshoot. Supporting these new distributed applications cost-effectively requires APM solutions that are up to the task. Now is a good time for CIOs and their teams to reevaluate and, if necessary, shore up their APM solutions to accommodate this new complexity. Otherwise, it is far too easy to end up with the “same old same old”— fifteen IT specialists missing their kid’s soccer games to figure out why business critical services aren’t performing to user expectations.

Related Links

Hot Topics

The Latest

How AI Agents Are Reshaping DataOps for the Always-On Enterprise

Enterprises today operate in a real-time environment where uninterrupted access to trusted data has become a baseline expectation for users, applications and automated systems. Traditional DataOps models, built on manual effort and human triage, cannot keep pace with this always active demand. AI agents are emerging as the operational backbone, ensuring consistent data availability, reinforcing trustworthiness and enabling a level of scale that manual processes cannot achieve ...

AI Deepfakes: Rethinking Trust in the Workplace

For decades, trust in the digital workplace rested on familiar signals. We trusted faces on video calls, voices on the phone, and emails that appeared to come from people we knew. These cues felt human and intuitive. They anchored how decisions were made, approvals were granted, and access was authorized. AI-powered deepfakes have quietly broken that model ...

Nine in Ten Enterprises Plan Cloud Data Repatriation amid Rising Cloud Costs and Data Sovereignty Mandates

Cloud migration was supposed to be a one-way door. For most enterprises, it turns out it isn't. Cloud data repatriation is a real and growing trend. A new survey ... finds that 89% of organizations plan to expand their on-premises infrastructure footprint over the next two years — and 75% have already moved at least some workloads back from public cloud in the past 24 months. The findings point to a broad rethinking of where data belongs ...

Why ITOps Need Right-Sized AI, Not Bigger Models

Over the past few years, large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the software industry. Given their ability to excel at multi-step reasoning, LLMs have helped enterprises streamline workflows and adapt to the unknown. However, employing such models comes with sky-high costs, latency issues, and limited flexibility. In the realm of IT operations, it is generally wiser to employ smaller, domain-specific models instead ...

The End of Reactive DevOps: AI-Driven Observability for Zero-Defect Digital Systems

For years, DevOps teams operated under a simple assumption: collect enough telemetry, and you can find and fix any problem. That assumption is breaking down. Modern enterprises now operate across microservices, hybrid cloud environments, APIs, Kubernetes, and highly automated delivery pipelines. Releases happen continuously, dependencies shift constantly, and failures spread faster than teams can diagnose them ...

5 Takeaways from the Observability Forecast for Media and Entertainment

New Relic surveyed IT and engineering leaders from the media and entertainment (M&E) sector to understand what's working — and where challenges persist with their observability practices. The findings reveal how M&E organizations are navigating rising platform complexity, audience expectations, and AI-driven change. Below are five takeaways that stand out ...

Why Moving Off the Cloud Is the Easy Part and What Comes Next Is Where Things Get Hard

Let me start with something I've seen play out more times than I can count. A team hits a wall with the cloud. Costs creep up, then spike. Performance starts to feel inconsistent. Someone in finance asks a simple question like "why did this double?" and nobody has a clean answer ... Maybe this isn't the right place for everything. That realization feels like a breakthrough, like you've identified the problem. In reality, you've just identified the starting line ...

MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Podcast - Episode 24: Network Observability Tool Sprawl

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 24, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses network observability tool sprawl ... 

Capacity Isn't a Guess: Observability-Driven Sizing for On-Prem Databases

In cloud-native systems, scaling is often as simple as moving a slider. For on-premise databases, the stakes are different. Over-provisioning hardware is expensive. Under-provisioning leads to performance bottlenecks that are difficult to fix once the equipment is in the rack ...

5 Security Principles Every Entrepreneur Should Apply to Leadership

When most people think about cybersecurity, they picture firewalls, encryption, and access controls — technical tools designed to protect systems and data. But beneath the technology lies a deeper set of principles about trust, decision-making, and resilience ... The best leaders don't eliminate risk. They manage it intelligently. And in many ways, cybersecurity offers a surprisingly useful playbook for doing exactly that ...

Why Your APM Solutions May Not Be “Cloud-Ready”

Julie Craig

Public Cloud provides a layer of abstraction between the functionality of a service and its delivery. Put simply, its functionality is unlocked by a credit card versus actual hands-on deployment. This is both a blessing and a curse.

Public Cloud customers are finding that, while Cloud services are easy to consume, they are not as easy to govern and manage. This abstraction layer means that traditional Application Performance Management (APM) solutions may not be as useful as they once were. As a result, many CIOs are finding it necessary to reevaluate management portfolios for Cloud-readiness.

Throughout most of 2011 and into 2012, Enterprise Management Associates’ (EMA) Application Management team conducted back to back research projects on APM for Cloud services. The research began during the Spring of 2011 with survey-based research assessing the impact of Cloud in all its flavors—public, private, and hybrid—on IT organizations.

After publishing the results of this study in August, we utilized the findings to formulate an EMA Radar Report, essentially an assessment of the solutions of eighteen leading APM vendors for “Cloud-readiness”. Released earlier this month (February, 2012), the findings are available for download at. www.emausa.com

The August report revealed that today’s companies are much further along in their Cloud deployments than most experts would have suspected. Nearly 85% are either already using private Cloud or are planning to do so within the next year. For SaaS that number is approximately 75%, for IaaS it is 65%, and for IaaS it stands at approximately 55%.

While these numbers are definitely interesting, to understand the true impact of Cloud it is necessary to take a look at how companies are using these services. After all, regardless of the underlying delivery mechanism, applications are still IT's primary deliverable, and application performance is the key measure of application quality. For this reason, the study also asked detailed questions about enterprise applications, architectures, and the role of Cloud in supporting production applications.

Table 1 shows adoption rates for a variety of deployment patterns for integrated applications. It illustrates the fact that transactions spanning heterogeneous hardware and software platforms are commonplace, definitely mainstream, and that those spanning on-premise and Cloud are not far behind.


Cloud-Ready APM

Patterns 1 and 2 relate to on-premise-hosted transactions. Patterns 3 and 4 relate to transactions touching the public Cloud, and, in the case of Pattern 4, integrations between multiple SaaS platforms.

While most of the APM solutions in the marketplace today were originally engineered to support primarily on-premise applications, many still do not support Patterns 1 and 2. They lack support for transactions spanning on-premise and mainframe or for those spanning Java and .NET.

APM solutions also vary widely in their levels of support for troubleshooting and root cause analysis. If the requirement is to quantify performance and availability, an application performance monitoring solution may suffice. However if there is an additional requirement for in-depth troubleshooting/root cause analysis support, monitoring solutions alone cannot provide adequate depth of visibility.

EMA’s APM taxonomy distinguishes performance monitoring from performance management for just this reason. In doing so, it makes the following distinctions:

Application Management Solutions: These solutions deliver visibility to and control of transactions, applications, and end-to-end services. The terminology covers a broad range of capabilities and products with visibility to application execution from a wide variety of instrumentation points.

Application Performance Monitoring and Application Performance Management are subsets of Application Management that focus on performance. The two classifications differ in their levels of support for troubleshooting and root cause analysis.

- Application Performance Monitoring solutions, such as End User Experience (EUE) management products, assess performance and availability.

- Application Performance Management (APM) solutions also monitor performance but support troubleshooting, problem determination, and root cause analysis as well. In other words, they have some level of visibility to the service model, which is the relationship between “top down” execution and “bottom up” infrastructure.

It is important to understand these distinctions because, although a wide variety of products are being marketed under the “APM” category, they are quite variable in terms of their capabilities. Monitoring solutions tend to be relatively inexpensive and may well be good choices if the requirement is simply to quantify performance and availability. Management capabilities do add cost, but that cost can quickly be recouped when automated troubleshooting replaces “all hands on deck” root cause analysis marathons.

Patterns 3 and 4 are examples of additional reasons why these distinctions are important. The adoption percentages for Pattern 3, for example, demonstrate that on-premise/public Cloud integrations are definitely mainstream deployment patterns. However, APM solutions vary significantly in the way they handle such transactions once they exit the enterprise IT ecosystem.

While virtually all have some depth of visibility to the on-premise segment of end-to-end execution, many see the public Cloud as a “black box”. They can monitor transactions to and from, and in doing so extrapolate “Cloud” performance. However they cannot penetrate beyond (or within) such integrations to a level that supports full-spectrum, tier-based reporting. Such reporting is essential for actually managing and troubleshooting complex applications.

This problem is even more prevalent in Pattern 4 deployments, since the majority of APM solutions have no visibility to the integration technology supporting SaaS to SaaS integrations. This is another case where off-premise tiers appear as a single black box as opposed to a series of steps with quantifications of execution time at each step.

Summary

What does this all this mean to CIO’s? One global bank is monitoring performance of customer applications from multiple locations worldwide. When they receive performance alerts, they manually triage to determine whether the problem is from all locations or a single location. They then do further manual triage to determine the actual problem source. Sound familiar? It should, because this is the same, quintessential problem-solving paradigm IT has utilized for eons—only now it is on a broader scale.

Cloud, particularly public Cloud, means that the underlying structure of transactions and applications becomes more opaque. Performance problems become more difficult to troubleshoot. Supporting these new distributed applications cost-effectively requires APM solutions that are up to the task. Now is a good time for CIOs and their teams to reevaluate and, if necessary, shore up their APM solutions to accommodate this new complexity. Otherwise, it is far too easy to end up with the “same old same old”— fifteen IT specialists missing their kid’s soccer games to figure out why business critical services aren’t performing to user expectations.

Related Links

Hot Topics

The Latest

How AI Agents Are Reshaping DataOps for the Always-On Enterprise

Enterprises today operate in a real-time environment where uninterrupted access to trusted data has become a baseline expectation for users, applications and automated systems. Traditional DataOps models, built on manual effort and human triage, cannot keep pace with this always active demand. AI agents are emerging as the operational backbone, ensuring consistent data availability, reinforcing trustworthiness and enabling a level of scale that manual processes cannot achieve ...

AI Deepfakes: Rethinking Trust in the Workplace

For decades, trust in the digital workplace rested on familiar signals. We trusted faces on video calls, voices on the phone, and emails that appeared to come from people we knew. These cues felt human and intuitive. They anchored how decisions were made, approvals were granted, and access was authorized. AI-powered deepfakes have quietly broken that model ...

Nine in Ten Enterprises Plan Cloud Data Repatriation amid Rising Cloud Costs and Data Sovereignty Mandates

Cloud migration was supposed to be a one-way door. For most enterprises, it turns out it isn't. Cloud data repatriation is a real and growing trend. A new survey ... finds that 89% of organizations plan to expand their on-premises infrastructure footprint over the next two years — and 75% have already moved at least some workloads back from public cloud in the past 24 months. The findings point to a broad rethinking of where data belongs ...

Why ITOps Need Right-Sized AI, Not Bigger Models

Over the past few years, large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the software industry. Given their ability to excel at multi-step reasoning, LLMs have helped enterprises streamline workflows and adapt to the unknown. However, employing such models comes with sky-high costs, latency issues, and limited flexibility. In the realm of IT operations, it is generally wiser to employ smaller, domain-specific models instead ...

The End of Reactive DevOps: AI-Driven Observability for Zero-Defect Digital Systems

For years, DevOps teams operated under a simple assumption: collect enough telemetry, and you can find and fix any problem. That assumption is breaking down. Modern enterprises now operate across microservices, hybrid cloud environments, APIs, Kubernetes, and highly automated delivery pipelines. Releases happen continuously, dependencies shift constantly, and failures spread faster than teams can diagnose them ...

5 Takeaways from the Observability Forecast for Media and Entertainment

New Relic surveyed IT and engineering leaders from the media and entertainment (M&E) sector to understand what's working — and where challenges persist with their observability practices. The findings reveal how M&E organizations are navigating rising platform complexity, audience expectations, and AI-driven change. Below are five takeaways that stand out ...

Why Moving Off the Cloud Is the Easy Part and What Comes Next Is Where Things Get Hard

Let me start with something I've seen play out more times than I can count. A team hits a wall with the cloud. Costs creep up, then spike. Performance starts to feel inconsistent. Someone in finance asks a simple question like "why did this double?" and nobody has a clean answer ... Maybe this isn't the right place for everything. That realization feels like a breakthrough, like you've identified the problem. In reality, you've just identified the starting line ...

MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Podcast - Episode 24: Network Observability Tool Sprawl

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 24, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses network observability tool sprawl ... 

Capacity Isn't a Guess: Observability-Driven Sizing for On-Prem Databases

In cloud-native systems, scaling is often as simple as moving a slider. For on-premise databases, the stakes are different. Over-provisioning hardware is expensive. Under-provisioning leads to performance bottlenecks that are difficult to fix once the equipment is in the rack ...

5 Security Principles Every Entrepreneur Should Apply to Leadership

When most people think about cybersecurity, they picture firewalls, encryption, and access controls — technical tools designed to protect systems and data. But beneath the technology lies a deeper set of principles about trust, decision-making, and resilience ... The best leaders don't eliminate risk. They manage it intelligently. And in many ways, cybersecurity offers a surprisingly useful playbook for doing exactly that ...