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

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

_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure

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

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
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure

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______________________________________________ _
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
>
_______________________________________________
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).
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure

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

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
>



--
Chris Krough
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure