Can you compare and contrast Dexda's capabilities with PagerDuty's alert grouping feature
We currently send alerts to PagerDuty because it has really good ML based alert grouping. From there it goes on to our ticketing system. Looks like this might be able to replace that capability (which would simplify things greatly on our side). It seems like grouped alerts are called “episodes”. Will episodes have the ability to be routed similar to the way alerts are routed through alert rules? In PD, in order to train the ML engine that some alerts belong together, all we have to do is combine two “incidents” (what PD calls a Dexda episode). That not only groups all the alerts from both groups into one group, but it also trains the ML to do better next time. Will Dexda have a similar capability? In PD, in order to train the ML engine that some alerts DON’T belong together, all we have to do is split one or more alerts from one “incident” (what PD calls a Dexda episode) into multiple incidents. This not only ungroups the alerts into separate groups, but also trains the ML to do better next time. Will Dexda have a similar capability? “Dexda will automatically re-cluster alerts when it identifies a more optimal clustering option” - does this mean it will change the grouping of alerts that it has already grouped? How is multi-tenancy handled? There’s a issuewith the tenant id currently that’s making it undefined for all our alerts. I don’t mind using tenant ID as long as we can get that issuefixed.