Thanks to all! It's been really encouraging to read all your emails. The presentation, ultimately stands up, gave me clear view of this wonderful design. But a couple days ago, we (me and my boss) already decided to go with Nagios. Seems to me (I am noob in this monitoring fields) Mon have advantage of its simplicity, while Nagios burdened by many (?unnecessary?) configurations files and scenarios. Anyway, we'll stick with it, and try to always make perl as my language of extension/plug-ins.
Again many thanks. Toddy Prawiraharjo. B2BE Pty. Ltd. Yulan Inc. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Nolan Sent: Friday, 8 September 2006 10:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: mon@linux.kernel.org Subject: Re: Starting On 9/3/06, Toddy Prawiraharjo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello all, > > I am looking for alternative to Nagios (or should i stick with it? need > opinions pls), and saw this Mon. The choice between Mon and other OSS monitoring systems like Nagios, Big Brother or any of the others is very much dependent upon your needs. My best summary of Mon is that its monitoring for sysadmins. Its not pretty, its not designed for management, its designed to allow a sysadmin to automate the performance monitoring that might otherwise be done ad-hoc or with cron jobs. It doesn't trivially provide the typical statistics gathering that many bean-counters are looking for, but its extensible and scalable in amazing ways. (See recent posts on this list about one company deploying a network of 2400 mon servers and 1200 locations, and my mon site which runs 500K monitoring tests a day, some of those on hostgroups with hundreds of hosts.) > Btw, i need some auto-monitoring tools to monitor basic unix and windows > based services, such as nfs, sendmail, smb, httpd, ftp, diskspace, etc. > I love perl so much, but then its been long time since it's been updated. Is > it still around and supported? If you love perl Mon may be perfect for you, because if there is a feature you need you can always send us a patch. :) Its definitely still around and supported. (I just posted a link to a mon 1.2.0 release candidate.) There hasn't been a lot of updates to the system in the last couple of years, but thats in part because the system is pretty stable as-is. There are certainly some big-picture changes we would like to do, but none of the current developers have had pressing reasons to work on the system. Personally, most of my original patches were based on CMU's needs when we did our Mon deployment, and since that time no major internal effort has been spent on extending the system. A review process of our monitoring systems is just starting now and that may result in either more programmer time being allocated to Mon or CMU might move away from Mon to some other system. (Obviously I'd be unhappy with that result, but I would continue to work with Mon both personally and in my consulting work.) > Any good reference on the web interface? (the > one from the site, mon.lycos.com is dead). I believe the most commonly used interface is mon.cgi, maintained by Ryan Clark, available at http://moncgi.sourceforge.net/ An older version of mon.cgi is included in the mon distribution. > And most importantly, where to > start? (any good documentation as starting point on how to use this Mon) > Start by reading the documentation, looking at the sample config file, and experimentation. A small installation can be setup in a matter of minutes. Once you've done a proof-of-concept install you can decide if Mon is right for you. -David _______________________________________________ mon mailing list mon@linux.kernel.org http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
