[ale] [EXTERNAL] Re: Monitoring Solutions

[Allen Beddingfield]

I am a firm believer that monitoring should be set up and managed by the same people who who set up and manage the servers being monitored.
We had a brief attempt at implementing a one size fits all, centrally deployed system.  It was a mess.  When you try to generalize too much, you get a design similar to a spork!
Currently, we have a monitoring system that the Windows team manages that meets their needs, Zabbix for the Linux world, and the networking team uses something that better meets their needs.


--
Allen Beddingfield
Systems Engineer
Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama
Office 205-348-2251
allen at ua.edu


________________________________________
From: Ale <ale-bounces at ale.org> on behalf of Jeff Hubbs via Ale <ale at ale.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 4:26 PM
To: ale at ale.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ale] Monitoring Solutions

I will say that one Nagios environment at A Previous EmployerTM made sysadminning hell because Nagios was implemented by the netops folks who never took into account what the systems involved actually did. Why yes, my file server lights up all its cores at 3AM when it runs ClamAV on all the Samba filespace (>200MiB/s read!) or when it performs a mksquashfs on same; don't bother me!

On 2/24/21 4:08 AM, Leam Hall via Ale wrote:
Working on my career skills, and I need to add a monitoring solution. Is Nagios still the first choice in open source options? I need to learn server, network, and application monitoring to beef up a challenge area in my Site Reliability Engineering skill set.

Happy Wednesday!

Leam