Any idea about that?

>----Messaggio originale----
>Da: "ml...@libero.it" <ml...@libero.it>
>Data: 29/11/2016 11.02
>A: "Arno Wijnhoven"<ar...@vsnsystemen.nl>, "checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.
de"<checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.de>
>Ogg: R: RE: [Check_mk (english)] R: Info request about possibile       &quot;
Distributed     Setup&quot; architecture
>
>Hi Arno
>
>thanks for your kind reply, but I still have a doubt:
>
>siteA (check_mkA1)----->check all devices in siteA
>siteB (check_mkB1)----->check all devices in siteB
>siteC (check_mkC1)----->check all devices in siteC
>siteD (check_mkD1)----->check all devices in siteD
>
>Accordingly to your explanation, if I have correctly understood, I could 
>"elect" one of the instance as master disabling logins on the other 
instances. 
>Assuming to chose check_mkA1 as master, it would do checks (as a normal 
>instance) + the master role for centralized login.
>
>Questions:
>Supposing that this instance completely fails and that is not possibile to 
>repair/restore in any way, would be easy to configure the master role on 
>another instance? And what about devices that it was actively monitoring?
>
>
>>----Messaggio originale----
>>Da: "Arno Wijnhoven" <ar...@vsnsystemen.nl>
>>Data: 29/11/2016 10.05
>>A: "'ml...@libero.it'"<ml...@libero.it>, "checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.
de"
><checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.de>
>>Ogg: RE: [Check_mk (english)] R: Info request about possibile &quot;
>Distributed    Setup&quot; architecture
>>
>>Morning Marco,
>>
>>What you want is really default behavior of the multisite setup, so it 
makes 
>me think you didn't google this thoroughly.
>>You should be able to find this info easily.
>>
>>Answer A:
>>- You can connect to each site and see devices that are being polled by 
that 
>site.
>>- You can also setup Multisite so you can login to just one 'main instance' 
>with webserver and view all devices.
>>
>>For what you want the 'login to just one webserver' sounds best IMO.
>>You can disable the logins on the other instances and use user rights and 
>user views to show users the devices they need to see on the main instance.
>>This way, everyone can use the same URL to access the website.
>>
>>I can't answer question B.
>>
>>Arno.
>>OMD / Check_MK 1.2.8.p10 on CentOS 6
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: checkmk-en-boun...@lists.mathias-kettner.de [mailto:checkmk-en-
>boun...@lists.mathias-kettner.de] On Behalf Of ml...@libero.it
>>Sent: dinsdag 29 november 2016 09:34
>>To: checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.de
>>Subject: [Check_mk (english)] R: Info request about possibile "Distributed 
>Setup" architecture
>>
>>No one have idea about how distributed setup does work?
>>
>>
>>>----Messaggio originale----
>>>Da: "ml...@libero.it" <ml...@libero.it>
>>>Data: 22/11/2016 10.05
>>>A: <checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.de>
>>>Ogg: [Check_mk (english)] Info request about possibile &quot;Distributed     
>>Setup&quot; architecture
>>>
>>>Hi all
>>>
>>>Is not very clear to me how distributed setup works with check_mk I'm 
>>>going to install a check_mk instance for each remote site so that
>>devices 
>>>will be monitored directly be their
>>>local instances. Very simple:
>>>
>>>siteA----->check all devices in siteA
>>>siteB----->check all devices in siteB
>>>
>>>What I need is to have a central dashboard so that users can see ALL 
>>>hosts/services
>>>
>>>Questions:
>>>
>>>a) Where users will connect? Direclty to each site or is it necessary 
>>>to create a third node acting as a central dashboard?
>>>b) In my knowledge, check_mk provides HA only with the hardware appliance. 
>>>Would be possibile to do something like that?
>>>
>>>siteA(check_mkA1)----->check all devices in siteA 
>>>siteA(check_mkA2)----->check all devices in siteA 
>>>siteB(check_mkB1----->check all devices in siteB 
>>>siteB(check_mkB2----->check all devices in siteB
>>>
>>>To sum up I would like to create two instances for each site and 
>>>manually balance devices between them so that, in case (for example) 
>>>check_mkA1 fails, I could assign devices to
>>check_mkA2. 
>>>Is possibile?
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>Marco
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>checkmk-en mailing list
>>checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.de
>>http://lists.mathias-kettner.de/mailman/listinfo/checkmk-en
>>
>>
>
>


_______________________________________________
checkmk-en mailing list
checkmk-en@lists.mathias-kettner.de
http://lists.mathias-kettner.de/mailman/listinfo/checkmk-en

Reply via email to