> -----Original Message----- > From: Spitzer, Andy (BL60:9D30) > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:05 PM > To: Beeton, Carolyn (CAR:9D60); Steinmann, Martin > (BL60:2500); [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] XECS-1316: alarm when HD is full > > Woof! > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:58:09 -0400, Beeton, Carolyn > (CAR:9D60) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > That is what mrtg does; > Yes. > > > we're already using it; > No. It's an optional componant. It's optional because there > is a large performance penalty for running it (the mrtg JPG > generating parts, not the snmp parts). It isn't recommended > for small underpowered systems (Pingtel's existing hardware > base, for example). > > > why not take advantage of its threshold monitoring as well? > Because it's overkill, and relies on an optional componant. > > --Woof! >
Could we make the expensive part of mrtg optional, and continue to use it for basic monitoring? It really doesn't make sense to me to reimplement monitoring and have another service to manage (in addition to mrtg, for those systems which would use it...). Can someone from management please weigh in and let me know how to proceed. Thanks, Carolyn _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
