Nice discussion on scalability and SCOM monitoring clients. To add to the context, my medium size setup of SCOM had the SQL stressed out with ACS enabled for about 30 Domain Controllers. It truly is important to get the SQL configuration and especially IO correct. In my customer’s case, we had to get HP come in to recommended better SAN IO interface and disk sub system.
Initially the SAN was design for basic purpose and was also used for Exchange. The overload of data from ACS even caused the impact on Exchange (long queue in writing to information store). Regards Sarbjit Singh From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of CESAR.ABREG0 . Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 2:43 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [msmom] SCOM Desktop monitoring 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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]> To: [email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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 ________________________________ [H_Logo] From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Jeremy Pavleck Sent: Wednesday, January 6, 2016 11:57 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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.
