If designed well and maintained, it does well past that number. I'm currently monitoring 3k windows servers, 4 *nix and 600 network devices with 6 management servers and 4 GWs.
At my last place we were monitoring 5k windows servers. Just like SCCM, SCOM needs proper SQL setup and disk IO. SQL is on physical cluster and everything else is VMs. If you gave the servers to handle the load, it can scale with no problems. On Fri, Jan 8, 2016, 8:56 AM Steven Peck <[email protected]> wrote: > Hmm… hadn’t thought about database sizing. Our major in house > application is client based to a back end. Parts of which are Linux > hosted, parts are on Windows and some bits still on mainframe. They seem > to have this vague vision of’ monitoring something and when you ask about > details they get all hand wavey and try and make the requirements my > responsibility (which is so not going to happen). > > Our licensing guy claims we are licensed for desktop because of the way we > are licensed for the System Center Suite… I suspect he asked about > something else but that’s not my issue at the moment. If it looks more > serious then I will insist on a more specific answer. Depending on ‘what > they actually mean’ it could be 200 desktops to 2000. it’s unlikely to be > all 5000 of them. Unfortunately I have some monitors that I may be forced > to revisit for alerting on (system grey agent’ for one). I will also be > suggesting an additional head count. > > Tiered…. hmm… going to have to look at that. Currently both > environments (Preproduction and Production have separate SCOM installs, > it’s not as clean cut as I would like though) have 2 Management servers > each and a couple of gateways. > > > Oh, and good seeing you again Jeremy. > > Steven > > > ------------------------------ > Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:12:46 -0500 > > Subject: Re: [msmom] SCOM Desktop monitoring > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > > Yup, seriously. And I work for Microsoft. Cost is an issue - 13,000 client > licenses cost $150,000, but the larger part is that they were all laptops. > Someone mentioned Systrack, which is actually what SCOM replaced. > It hasn't been completely rolled out, I'm still trying to instill some > things into the customer - mainly, when you have laptops that aren't using > DirectAccess or some other 'always on' vpn, it will make SCOM not work - > unless you OMS, which is has a monitoring agent (The same agent in v.next) > that allows reporting to a SCOM MS & an OMS workspace - you have to write a > lot of things to deal with offline agents. > > That being said, the customer has an employee that basically got > everything in place, had licenses ordered, kicked out systrack, etc - so > our job was to show it could work, and it can. They also monitor servers, > but in a tiered fashion. The SERVER-MG is parent and CLIENTS-MG is child > and handles communication between laptops and SCOM. > Hardware wise, it wasn't bad. 6 MS will cover all of them. But the DB > servers have to be beastly. In fact, the DW server consists of a 40 disk > RAID10 just for the data. But we were able to show that it would work, and > even show some neat additional things, like being able to detect when users > need a beefier machine, etc etc. I'll try to go into more detail this > evening. > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Marcum, John <[email protected]> wrote: > > Seriously? Every time I’ve even thought about doing that all the SCOM guys > and MS folks tell me it’s insane to even think about doing it. I only have > 1000 desktops where I am now and I was told it was an insane idea. > > > * ------------------------------ * > > * John Marcum* > > MCITP, MCTS, MCSA > * Desktop Architect* > > * Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP* > * ------------------------------ * > > > > [image: H_Logo] > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jeremy Pavleck > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 6, 2016 11:57 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [msmom] SCOM Desktop monitoring > > > > I will get back to you in more detail when I can, but yes I have > experience. In fact, we just rolled out SCOM monitoring to 13,000 desktops. > > > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Steven Peck <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am beginning some research into monitoring desktops with SCOM. Does > anyone know of a good best practices document or write up on doing this? > Currently all my experience is with server monitoring. The request is > typically vague at this point but I want to at least get an overview. > Checking on the current sources now (TechNet docs) but figured I would ask > if anyone knew of something more specific. Like is it even a good idea to > mix server and client monitoring in a mid sized environment? (~1300 > servers monitored currently) > > > > Thanks, > > Steven Peck > > http://www.blkmtn.org > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be > protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have > received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to > this e-mail and then delete it from your computer. > > > >
