On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 02:30:24PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 12:45 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 07:03:52PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > Mike McGrath wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Anyone know when zenoss will be in Fedora? It is a requisite of
> > >> Even an estimate?
> > >
> > > Doesn't look like it is going to be soon looking at
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435470
> > >
> > > Rahul
> > If it got a little attention and TLC it might move along quicker. :)
> > Also using ZenOSS at work. Also have used OpenNMS. I do like both.
> > I'm a little more familiar with RRD vs however Zabbix does graphs
> > (which really might be simpler than RRD in reality).
> I wouldn't say simpler, just different. Zabbix stores them raw in a
> database so they can, for example, easily be imported into a spreadsheet.
which, imo, is simpler, b/c rrd's mechanism is downright frustrating to
parse in anything other than rrd.
Exactly... although it is certainly possible to do the same things with
RRD (including generating an RRD with historical data), it's definitely
not as straightforward as the database method... and rrd files also
tend to be unwieldy and inefficient to write updates to when you start
scaling real high. I know OpenNMS has worked around this by writing
their own queuing system for rrd writes and using their own rrd format
in a way I believe.
I guess from the looks of the state of ZenOSS it's off the table
(unless you want to use it on a RHEL machine and could maybe get it via
RHX -- would that fit into the philosophy here?) and maybe Zabbix or
OpenNMS are the only other realistic alternatives.
Of course, OpenNMS isn't packaged for Fedora yet either is it? They do
have RPM's however and a yum repo so it might not be a lot of work to
get it done.