Downloaded 33 times
Uploaded byIcinga
Why favour Icinga over Nagios @ OSDC 2015
Icinga is an open source monitoring system that is more scalable than Nagios. It uses a multi-threaded C++ core that allows it to distribute load automatically and monitor thousands of devices quickly. Icinga 2's configuration is more flexible than Nagios and allows for more sophisticated setups through features like templates, host groups, and variables. Icinga also includes components like Icinga Web 2 that provide responsive interfaces for management and monitoring.
More Related Content
Similar to Why favour Icinga over Nagios @ OSDC 2015
Why favour Icinga over Nagios @ OSDC 2015
- 1. www.icinga.org Why favour Icingaover Nagios OSDC Berlin - 23th April 2015
- 2. • Bernd Erk • Working @NETWAYS • Icinga Co-Founder • @gethash
- 3.
- 4. Open Source EnterpriseMonitoring Icinga is a scalable and extensible monitoring system which checks the availability of your resources, notifies users of outages and provides extensive BI data.
- 5. • Originally forkedfrom Nagios in 2009 • Independent version Icinga 2 since 2014
- 6.
- 9. Icinga Core C-based source MySQL,PostgreSQL, Oracle Icinga Quality, Testing and Community Support Website and Open Source Ticketing System Icinga Reports based on Jasper Reports Icinga Doc based on Markdown 3rd Party Tools Icinga Web based on PHP using ExtJS, Agavi MVC IDOUTILS Icinga Web 2 Based on PHP / responsive design Icinga 2 C++-based source with multiple components IDO Livestatus Cluster …
- 10. ICINGA 2 -INTRODUCTION
- 11. • Monitors everything • In a regular interval • Gathering status • Collect performance data
- 12. • Notifies usingany channel • Detects dependencies • Handles events in configured way
- 13. • Forwards logsto Logstash and Graylog • Passes performance data to Graphite, OpenTSDB or InfluxDB
- 14. • Based onC++ and Boost • Supports MySQL and PostgreSQL • Includes a extensive template library
- 15. • Version 2.3.4is out since a couple of days • Puppet, Chef and Ansible support • Packages and Vagrant Box available
- 16. WHY NAGIOS™ ISGOOD?
- 17. • Monitoring thingsis very easy • Very simple software stack • No complex external dependencies
- 18. • Active checksare powerful • Gathering performance data • Huge community • Thousands of Plugins
- 19. OK, BUT WHYICINGA THEN?
- 20. NAGIOS DOES NOTSCALE
- 21. • It isjust a single loop • Limitations using external interfaces
- 22. • Icinga 2is a multithreaded C++ Core • Load is distributed automatically • Ability to monitor thousands of devices in second interval
- 24.
- 25. # tar xzvf mk-‐livestatus-‐1.2.4.tar.gz # cd mk-‐livestatus-‐1.2.4 # ./configure -‐-‐prefix=/usr/local/icinga -‐-‐exec-‐prefix=/usr/local/icinga # make # cp src/livestatus.o /usr/local/icinga/bin
- 26. define module { module_name mklivestatus path /usr/local/icinga/bin/livestatus.o module_type neb args /usr/local/icinga/var/rw/live }
- 27.
- 28. • We havea powerful CLI • Adding new features is easy • You can really really do sophisticated setups … but you don’t have too
- 29. # icinga2 featureenable livestatus # icinga2 feature enable ido-mysql
- 30.
- 31. NO CLUSTERING ANDDISTRIBUTION
- 32. • There isno integrated failover mechanism • Configuration is not distributed • No shared monitoring information
- 33. • Zones formultitenancy environments • Support for logic splits in the config • Availability and scaling zones • Automatic redistribution of checks
- 34.
- 35. SECURITY IS AMESS
- 36. • NSCA works,but not in a good way • NRPE has a couple of security issues • You can make it secure … by hand
- 37. • Bidirectional communicationusing SSL • “binlog” like retention for events • Distributed features throughout the cluster
- 38.
- 39. define service{ host_name linux1,linux2,linux3,...,linux9 service_description ssh-‐check other service directives ... }
- 40. apply Service "ssh" { import "generic-‐service” check_command = "ssh” assign where host.address && host.vars.os == "Linux” }
- 41. apply Service "ssh" { import "generic-‐service” check_command = "ssh” assign where host.address && host.vars.os == "Linux” ignore where host.vars.test == true }
- 42. define hostgroup{ hostgroup_name linux-‐servers alias Linux Servers members linux1,linux2,linux3 }
- 43. object Host “mysql-‐server1" { address = "10.0.0.1“ check_command = "hostalive“ } object HostGroup "mysql-‐server" { display_name = "MySQL Server“ assign where match("*mysql*", host.name) }
- 44.
- 45. object Service ”webservice" { import "generic-‐service” check_command = ”load” host_name = “a really great server” vars.load_wload1 = {{ if (get_time_period(“9to5”).is_inside) { return 40 } else { return 60 } }} }
- 46. • Different configformat • Won’t miss the old config! • It is really time for change • You will love it!
- 47. WHAT YOU SEEIS WHAT YOU GET
- 48.
- 51. • Parsing status.datis not really cool • Executing commands is hard • Very inflexible architecture
- 52. • Limitations incurrent Icinga interfaces • Really hard to extend and integrate • No unified interface so far
- 53. • Easy toextend and embed • Multiple authentication providers • Support for db and livestatus • Responsive
- 54. Web 2 Monitoring Docs BPGraphite PNP
- 55.
- 56.
- 57.
- 58. Portland 2015 October 10th KualaLumpur 2015 June 9th
- 59.
- 61. • Download Icinga2 • Rethink you configuration • Install Icinga Web 2 and play with it • Give us feedback #icinga
- 62.