So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
I ask because it seems like
A) we've been using zabbix for over a year and still haven't turned nagios off.
B) Even after using it this whole time, I often run into issues adding new monitoring.
Am I alone in this? Anyone out there super happy with our zabbix install? I love the results we get from it, but it feels like it's turning into a maintenance nightmare.
-Mike
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Mike McGrath wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
I ask because it seems like
A) we've been using zabbix for over a year and still haven't turned nagios off.
B) Even after using it this whole time, I often run into issues adding new monitoring.
Am I alone in this? Anyone out there super happy with our zabbix install? I love the results we get from it, but it feels like it's turning into a maintenance nightmare.
I never use zabbix except for it's graphs. I rely on nagios to tell me if something has broke.
-sv
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
FWIW I stopped using Zabbix at $DAYJOB a while ago. I've been giving OpenNMS a try out and mostly I'm happy so far. The primary blocker for use in Fedora Infrastructure is getting it packaged properly.
Have we considered ZenOSS?
On 2010-03-04, at 8:58 AM, Jeffrey Ollie jeff@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
FWIW I stopped using Zabbix at $DAYJOB a while ago. I've been giving OpenNMS a try out and mostly I'm happy so far. The primary blocker for use in Fedora Infrastructure is getting it packaged properly.
-- Jeff Ollie _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Michael Carruthers wrote:
Have we considered ZenOSS?
<talking about things he doesn't know about>
I was always under the impression that ZenOSS wasn't free. Or at least wasn't fully free. Is that true?
</back to talking about what he knows about>
-Mike
On 2010-03-04, at 8:58 AM, Jeffrey Ollie jeff@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
FWIW I stopped using Zabbix at $DAYJOB a while ago. I've been giving OpenNMS a try out and mostly I'm happy so far. The primary blocker for use in Fedora Infrastructure is getting it packaged properly.
-- Jeff Ollie _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
I was always under the impression that ZenOSS wasn't free. Or at least wasn't fully free. Is that true?
It's one of those free/non-free combos - a free "Core", and then an enterprise version. The core version has most functionality that we'd need, but is somewhat difficult to configure IME. But the web interface of it is fairly slick if you can make it work right.
For one of my customers at $DAYJOB, we're using the free version of another one of these, Hyperic HQ from Spring. It provides great depth, but the server and the agent are all Java based, and I've never used it for general process monitoring (mostly I want to go into great depth of JVM's there).
I have used it extensively and I find to be quite a bit easier than anything else I have run into. In addition it has nice pragmatic methods to add devices in addition to the wonderful web interface. On 2010-03-04, at 9:58 AM, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
I was always under the impression that ZenOSS wasn't free. Or at least wasn't fully free. Is that true?
It's one of those free/non-free combos - a free "Core", and then an enterprise version. The core version has most functionality that we'd need, but is somewhat difficult to configure IME. But the web interface of it is fairly slick if you can make it work right.
For one of my customers at $DAYJOB, we're using the free version of another one of these, Hyperic HQ from Spring. It provides great depth, but the server and the agent are all Java based, and I've never used it for general process monitoring (mostly I want to go into great depth of JVM's there). _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
Zenoss CORE (free version) has most of the features of "Enterprise", sans support. Its all based on Python and Zope, so you can write extensions to monitor pretty much anything.
http://community.zenoss.org/community/zenpacks
Chris
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Michael Carruthers michaeldcarruthers@gmail.com wrote:
I have used it extensively and I find to be quite a bit easier than anything else I have run into. In addition it has nice pragmatic methods to add devices in addition to the wonderful web interface. On 2010-03-04, at 9:58 AM, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
I was always under the impression that ZenOSS wasn't free. Or at least wasn't fully free. Is that true?
It's one of those free/non-free combos - a free "Core", and then an enterprise version. The core version has most functionality that we'd need, but is somewhat difficult to configure IME. But the web interface of it is fairly slick if you can make it work right.
For one of my customers at $DAYJOB, we're using the free version of another one of these, Hyperic HQ from Spring. It provides great depth, but the server and the agent are all Java based, and I've never used it for general process monitoring (mostly I want to go into great depth of JVM's there). _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Michael Carruthers wrote:
Have we considered ZenOSS?
<talking about things he doesn't know about>
I was always under the impression that ZenOSS wasn't free. Or at least wasn't fully free. Is that true?
</back to talking about what he knows about>
-Mike
Zenoss is F/LOSS - the non-free stuff is basically add-ons, for things like Active Directory integration, monitoring $foo app, etc.
In it's current state (2.5.2, released yesterday) it has virtually zero chance of being included in Fedora. It bundles python 2.4, twisted, zope (and an old version at that) etc. A number of distros have been complaining about this (including us), and supposedly this weekend the code in SVN is making the jump to a recent zope (but still a packaging nightmare) and python 2.6.
Zenoss is largely written in python, and most of the interesting addons (such as the AMQP, and the about to be debuted libvirt monitoring add-on) are all written in python as well, so at least it's something we know/have experience in. It's less lightweight than nagios in my opinion.
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:50 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Michael Carruthers wrote:
Have we considered ZenOSS?
We use ZenOSS at $dayjob and it suits us very well. However, getting it into Fedora is near impossible:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435470
Which brings us back to:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2007-May/100028.html which is still an issue.
- Jonathan
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
FWIW I stopped using Zabbix at $DAYJOB a while ago. I've been giving OpenNMS a try out and mostly I'm happy so far. The primary blocker for use in Fedora Infrastructure is getting it packaged properly.
Now this is an interesting tidbit. Can you give a brief review of the two and why you're on OpenNMS now?
-Mike
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 11:49:53 -0600 (CST) From: Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com Reply-To: Fedora Infrastructure infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To: Fedora Infrastructure infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Monitoring
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
FWIW I stopped using Zabbix at $DAYJOB a while ago. I've been giving OpenNMS a try out and mostly I'm happy so far. The primary blocker for use in Fedora Infrastructure is getting it packaged properly.
Now this is an interesting tidbit. Can you give a brief review of the two and why you're on OpenNMS now?
We've actually been looking at OpenNMS for noc use. I have not developed an opinion about it yet.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
FWIW I stopped using Zabbix at $DAYJOB a while ago. I've been giving OpenNMS a try out and mostly I'm happy so far. The primary blocker for use in Fedora Infrastructure is getting it packaged properly.
Now this is an interesting tidbit. Can you give a brief review of the two and why you're on OpenNMS now?
I got frustrated with Zabbix because as things grew, it became very cumbersome to add services to be monitored, especially in an environment like mine where I need to monitor a lot of Cisco gear, but I don't necessarily want to graph the state of every port.
I decided to try OpenNMS because of the "enterprise" level monitoring systems they are the most committed to Open Source (IMHO, "Open Core" doesn't count and I try and avoid it whenever possible).
I like it because it does a very good job of discovering your network. I have things set up so that as soon as a new switch sends a SNMP trap OpenNMS will discover the switch and start monitoring it. The discovery process and what gets monitored is highly customizable as well.
One other thing that I like is that it uses PostgreSQL as it's database, which probably not everyone would :).
One downside of OpenNMS is that it's configured through a large number of XML files. It can be hard to grok what goes where at first and the documentation is sketchy at best. It's also annoying when you install a new version and you have to go through a few .rpmnew files to see what changed (although I bring a lot of that pain on myself since I'm running nightly snapshots of the development version).
One other downside is that for large environments you have to do a lot of tuning of PostgreSQL and be prepared to commit a lot of memory. I have my setup running pretty well right now but I had to throw a lot of resources at it. But maybe that's just because I don't have a lot of experience optimizing PostgreSQL databases.
Professional support is available for OpenNMS... maybe if Fedora is serious about using it they might comp us some support?
I'm really still in the testing phases with it, as I don't have a lot of time to really dig into the details. I'm not sure how long I'll be running it though as non-technical issues might prevail (the rest of the department isn't as committed to Open Source as I am and want something shrink-wrapped and GUI-riffic).
On 04/03/10 16:54, Mike McGrath wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
I ask because it seems like
A) we've been using zabbix for over a year and still haven't turned nagios off.
B) Even after using it this whole time, I often run into issues adding new monitoring.
Am I alone in this? Anyone out there super happy with our zabbix install? I love the results we get from it, but it feels like it's turning into a maintenance nightmare.
-Mike _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
Something else to keep in mind is, that nagios already has providers and types in puppet. Another monitoring solution would need extra work, to puppetize it.
Regards,
Tristan
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Tristan Santore wrote:
On 04/03/10 16:54, Mike McGrath wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
I ask because it seems like
A) we've been using zabbix for over a year and still haven't turned nagios off.
B) Even after using it this whole time, I often run into issues adding new monitoring.
Am I alone in this? Anyone out there super happy with our zabbix install? I love the results we get from it, but it feels like it's turning into a maintenance nightmare.
-Mike _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
Something else to keep in mind is, that nagios already has providers and types in puppet. Another monitoring solution would need extra work, to puppetize it.
We never used the puppet types for nagios anyway.
-Mike
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
So I'm just going to throw this out there. Anyone else think zabbix isn't quite working out?
I ask because it seems like
A) we've been using zabbix for over a year and still haven't turned nagios off.
B) Even after using it this whole time, I often run into issues adding new monitoring.
Am I alone in this? Anyone out there super happy with our zabbix install? I love the results we get from it, but it feels like it's turning into a maintenance nightmare.
I am supposed to be helping on the Zabbix install and it has so far annoyed me. I like some parts compared to nagios but other things seem to require long strings of click, menu, click, text entry, click when a simple edit of a text file and some sed changes to make variants would be so much faster (for me at least). However this may be me being an old idiit not learning new tricks.
I would prefer to look at something that we can func/puppetize.
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org