all services

// observability

Monitoring & Observability

Alert fatigue is not caused by too few dashboards. It is caused by alerts that fire on causes instead of symptoms, until people stop reading them.

The two failure modes

Either nothing alerts and you learn about outages from customers, or everything alerts and the on-call engineer has muted the channel. The second is more common and more dangerous, because it looks like you have monitoring.

What we change

We start from the user’s experience and work inwards. Can people log in? Can they complete the core action? How long does it take? Those become your SLOs, and your error budget becomes the thing that decides whether next sprint is features or reliability.

Then we cut. Most alerting setups can lose over half their rules without losing coverage, because they alert on causes — high CPU, a restarted pod — that frequently do not affect anyone. CPU at 90% is not an incident. Checkout failing is.

Keeping the bill sane

Observability platforms are priced to grow faster than your traffic. We set retention tiers by value — full-fidelity for recent data, sampled or aggregated beyond that — and drop the high-cardinality labels nobody queries. It is common to cut ingest substantially while improving what you can actually answer.

What you get

  • SLOs defined per user-facing journey, with error budgets the business understands
  • Alerts on symptoms — is the user affected? — routed to whoever can actually fix it
  • Dashboards built for an incident, not for a screen on a wall
  • Distributed tracing so a slow request can be followed across services
  • A log pipeline with retention tiers, so observability does not become your third-largest bill
  • Every alert paired with a runbook link — no alert without an action

Tell us where it hurts.

The first call is free — and it's with an engineer.