<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000099">
I agree. Initially I had Nagios doing all the trending. But with 400+
network devices and many of them with multiple 48 port blades, I found
Cacti was easier to configure... it scaled a lot better. For a smaller
network, you could easily do just Nagios. I've had no issues at all
with Nagios + PNP for alerts and trending. In fact, Nagios still
watches my core network devices (but not all the ports of them... ie:
Nagios watches that switch1 is up and available and trends its CPU and
memory usage... however I use Cacti for trending the 6 blades each with
48 ports in switch1). This way, if switch1 fails or utilization is too
high, Nagios tells me, but if a particular user is hogging all our
bandwidth or having lots of packet loss, I find that via Cacti.<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">
A. Davis
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nccomp@gmail.com">nccomp@gmail.com</a>
"There is no limit to what a man can accomplish
if he doesn't care who gets the credit." - Ronald Reagan
</pre>
<br>
<br>
Daniel Emmanuel Feinsmith wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:913905.71792.qm@web303.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">It depends on the intensity of your snmp usage. Cacti has a native
daemon to do large scale snmp getting, and it does a great job of it.
So if u have hundreds of devices, each with a lot of interfaces, u
will probably like cacti. The user interface is also well done for
graphing snmp data and thresholding on it using the threshold plugin.
=====================
Daniel Feinsmith
=====================
{sent from iPhone}
On Apr 8, 2009, at 8:15 AM, Christopher McAtackney
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:cristoir@gmail.com"><cristoir@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2009/4/8 Andrew Davis <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nccomp@gmail.com"><nccomp@gmail.com></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">And just an FYI from my own experience... putting Nagios & Cacti on
the same
server has been somewhat problematic for us. We have over 400 network
devices between switches, routers, WAPs, etc. We also have about 300
monitored servers. Initially I had Nagios and Cacti both on one
server with
Cacti running via cron every 5 minutes. About every 5 minutes, my
shells
would become unresponsive for roughly 30 to 90 seconds. Turning off
either
Nagios or Cacti resolved the issue. Running both seems to have
hammered the
server a bit (4Gb of RAM, 2 x dual core 2.x Ghz CPUs). We don't
integrate
Cacti and Nagios, however. Nagios does both trending and alerts of
all
servers. Cacti does trending only of all network devices/ports.
Once I moved
Cacti to its own server, all was fine as far as load/latency went.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">That's useful to know Andrew, thanks.
Regarding the trending of network devices - is there any reason why
this can't be done by Nagios? I intend to install PNP4Nagios to take
care of graphing anyway, but I think it would be nice to have all my
monitored resources under the one system (for notifications and ease
of administration).
Is there some major advantage that Cacti provides when it comes to
SNMP monitoring of network devices that cannot be achieved with Nagios
and the various SNMP plug-ins available for it (e.g. like these ones
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nagios.manubulon.com">http://nagios.manubulon.com</a>) ?
Cheers,
Chris
---
---
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com">http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com</a>
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net">Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users</a>
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when
reporting any issue.
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com">http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com</a>
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net">Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users</a>
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue.
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>