SV: Nagios 2.0 stable

[Frederik Vanhee]

I can confirm this.
I run a central Nagios server and 15 distributed servers checking 2600 
services in total and Nagios 2.0 meant a real performance boost.
In particular the cgi's in the webinterface run much smoother than in 
Nagios 1.2

Frederik

jeff vier wrote:

>On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 10:45 -0500, Petrucci, Joseph wrote:
>  
>
>>It is hard enough to talk large companies into using opensource products without having to explain to them it is a Beta. I have several companies that I monitor remotely and will not run a beta version. It would look to my clients like do not care if I can actually support them or not. Also In my testing (which admittedly just started) I am having trouble with Distributed Nagios instances. I believe it is just a config issue and have not had much time to research it but Version 2.0 is not as stable as 1.2 as far as I can see.
>>    
>>
>
>I run a distributed 2.0 environment (3 dist sites, the central server
>also doing active checks).
>
>I had a large boost in performance and stability from going to 2.0.
>
>Beta doesn't mean ANYTHING.
>
>If beta *meant* the code was *necessarily* more stable, explain anything
>from Redmond to me.
>
>--boinger
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net
>>[mailto:nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net]On Behalf Of Sean Dilda
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 10:31 AM
>>To: boinger at tradingtechnologies.com
>>Cc: Bergström Sebastian; nagios-users
>>Subject: Re: SV: [Nagios-users] Nagios 2.0 stable
>>
>>
>>jeff vier wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 11:39 +0100, Bergström Sebastian wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I realise that my question is unclear. I'm refering to the fact that 2.0 still is in beta. 
>>>>We are running v.1.2 currently and are interested in the v.2.0.
>>>>
>>>>I'm wondering if anyone has an idea of how much time it might take before 2.0 can go into a stable (non-beta) state.
>>>>
>>>>Any idea?
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>To put it bluntly: Who Cares?
>>>      
>>>
>>Most professionals.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>There are so many of us running it in production (I, myself, have been
>>>doing so since "alpha"), isn't that good enough?
>>>      
>>>
>>Just because you walk the bleeding edge doesn't mean everyone else wants to.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>There will always be bugs, no matter what you call it (alpha, beta, pr,
>>>rc, gold, etc).
>>>
>>>In my, and I'm sure many others', experience, super-pre-double-alpha
>>>code from a nice community-supported project like this is still going to
>>>have less bugs than anything similar from Microsoft no matter how many
>>>"final" versions they have.
>>>
>>>And if something major does come up, there's usually a fix/work-around
>>>in a few hours or days, not weeks or months.
>>>      
>>>
>>I'm not opposed to using software that's still under development, but I 
>>try to avoid it whenever possible in production environments.  If its as 
>>good as you say it is, then maybe it shouldn't be called beta, but 
>>that's an argument to be made with the developers, not the users.
>>
>>For most projects, terms like 'alpha' and 'beta' have certain meanings 
>>in regards to how stable/tested the code is and how likely it is to 
>>change before final release.  And likewise, official releases tend to 
>>not do things like drastically change the config layout as part of a 
>>bugfix, whereas an alpha or beta might.
>>
>>You may have no problems with it, and that's great.  However, there are 
>>people out there whose job performance is tied to how well stuff like 
>>this operates.  As such, they tend to make the wise choice of waiting 
>>for an official release before investing time setting up something and 
>>risking having to completely change your setup in a couple of weeks.  To 
>>many professionals, having an official (as opposed to beta) release is 
>>an indication from the developers that this code is ready for prime time 
>>and will have bugfixes that don't cause you to rework things.
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>This SF.net email is sponsored by: 2005 Windows Mobile Application Contest
>>Submit applications for Windows Mobile(tm)-based Pocket PCs or Smartphones
>>for the chance to win $25,000 and application distribution. Enter today at
>>http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idh82&alloc_id148&op=ick
>>_______________________________________________
>>Nagios-users mailing list
>>Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
>>::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
>>::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.net email is sponsored by Microsoft Mobile & Embedded DevCon 2005
>Attend MEDC 2005 May 9-12 in Vegas. Learn more about the latest Windows
>Embedded(r) & Windows Mobile(tm) platforms, applications & content.  Register
>by 3/29 & save $300 http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6883&alloc_id=15149&op=click
>_______________________________________________
>Nagios-users mailing list
>Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
>::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
>::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
>
>  
>



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Microsoft Mobile & Embedded DevCon 2005
Attend MEDC 2005 May 9-12 in Vegas. Learn more about the latest Windows
Embedded(r) & Windows Mobile(tm) platforms, applications & content.  Register
by 3/29 & save $300 http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idh83&alloc_id149&op=click
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null