On 16/10/2017 18:10, Ralph Seichter wrote: > On 16.10.2017 17:50, Alan McKinnon wrote: > >> Nagios and I go way back, way way waaaaaay back. I now recommend it >> never be used unless there really is no other option. > > Have you tried Icinga 2 (*) yet? It originally started as a Nagios fork > and uses plugins to monitor, but the rule-based configuration mechanism > of Icinga 2 is IMO more powerful and easier than Nagios' mechanism. I've > used both Nagios and Icinga for years, and I definitely prefer Icinga 2. > > -Ralph > > (*) https://www.icinga.com/products/icinga-2/ >
Yes, I know Icinga as well. It fixes many of Nagios' shortcomings - the first batch of commits after the fork took care of many of those - but still suffers from all of Nagios' design faults. In short, I'm not interested in going back to Nagios after a year's migration to get away from it. Same for Icinga, Shinken, Sensu and all the other many nagios forks out there. Also Zabbix. My current monitoring is snmp-based, and all I need monit for is as a very narrowly-defined single-purpose watchdog. -- Alan McKinnon [email protected]
