Datadog cost reduction
Review noisy logging before expanding your Datadog
spend.
Start with the application logging requirement. Existing log levels, agents, and processors may already meet it. Consider Cerbi when consistent policy across connected teams and evidence of control operation remain a recurring gap.
The problem
Understand which logs are useful and which controls are missing
Noisy logs can consume resources, but volume reduction alone does not establish the need for Cerbi. Identify the logging risk, test existing controls, and compare the full operating cost. Pricing and any savings depend on your vendor terms, configuration, and actual workload.
Before and after
// Governance runs at emission time, inside the application process. The sink receives only governed output.
Architecture
Test the selected application logging path
The illustration shows one integrated application path. CerbiStream applies supported policy actions before export; Gateway is another option for explicitly routed OTLP logs. CerbiShield manages policy, rollout, and recorded evidence. Validate downstream compatibility and useful debugging context.
Your application
emits log events
Logger framework
MEL / Serilog / NLog
CerbiStream
filters at emission time
Datadog Agent
receives filtered output
Datadog
indexes governed events only
// Cerbi runs inside your process. No sidecar, no agent, no additional network hop.
Why existing tools are too late
Measure before making a savings claim
Existing controls
Review logger configuration, filtering, and pipeline processing before adding another component.
Total cost
Measure log volume, runtime overhead, Azure operation, and commercial terms. This page makes no savings-percentage or ROI promise.
Evidence requirement
Decide whether ongoing policy versions, rollout, and recorded outcomes solve a gap that simple filtering does not.
How Cerbi fits with your stack
A logging-policy evaluation with explicit boundaries
Discover
Use the free Scanner to find potential logging risks; review findings against existing controls.
Evaluate CerbiShield
Agree one workload, supported policy actions, and an evidence window before deploying the paid operating layer.
Preserve the stack
Keep existing observability destinations. Integration and policy configuration are required on the paths you choose.
Decide from evidence
Review actual outcomes, downstream compatibility, overhead, and operating responsibility before expanding.
Common questions
Frequently asked
Review the logging-control gap
Bring a logging finding or evidence requirement. Compare existing controls, then scope one CerbiShield workload and policy if a recurring gap remains.
// local demo path: install from NuGet, PyPI, Maven, or the Go module registry - no account required