I agree that collectd wouldn't be the first thing that comes my mind either...
I wouldn't dare to suggest Nagios or Icinga being part of an LPIC-2 exam as both could easily fill an exam on their own. I see that topic more about getting an idea of which kind of properties exist and how to measure them. Any simple tool would be sufficient for that task. Just removing collectd would make 200.2 hard to test... Do you have any other tool that you see more prominent / useful these days? Or, given we drop collectd, would you prefer to extend the "Awareness of monitoring solutions" part to feature knowledge and comparison of Icinga2 and Cacti (or keep Nagios and MRTG included?) and maybe spice in conceptual knowledge of SNMP? We should try to avoid "submarines" (to quote Anselm) which consist of a tiny tiny bullet in the objectives and open enormous discussions in training. Fabian On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Bryan J Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Bryan J Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >> These types of objectives will always be difficult to keep "Scope Creep" >> from entering. that said ... >> > > Sorry, "Send" hit. Continuing ... > > Ultimately, the context is "Capacity Planning." So we're actual talking > about collecting statistics. So instead of talking about collectd, > Nagios/Icinga, etc..., why aren't we actually talking about what most of > these tools use? [1] > > I.e., RRDTools and its RRD files > > Just saying, I'd focus on RRD and similar solutions, under the > objective's context, "Capacity Planning." > > -- bjs > > [1] > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRDtool#Other_tools_that_use_RRDtool_as_a_DBMS_and.2For_graphing_subsystem > > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Anselm Lingnau < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> > My support for munin as easy & nice-looking capacity planning + Icinga >>> > (as nagios successor) for monitoring. >>> >>> We can probably bikeshed this until the cows come home. >>> >>> The advantage of collectd is that it is small, it measures the most >>> important >>> things, and it is reasonably easy to understand. Apart from that, if you >>> have >>> seen one monitoring tool you have more or less seen them all, and >>> everybody is >>> going to be using something different from everybody else anyway. >>> >>> If we put Nagios or Icinga on the exam, the next question is going to be >>> where >>> do we stop, since surely we don't want everyone to have to know all the >>> 94 >>> Nagios plugins in Debian Jessie, but the 10 plugins that you use are >>> likely >>> going to be different from the 10 plugins that I use or that Simone uses, >>> while each one of us will argue vehemently that *our* plugins are the >>> most >>> important ones and absolutely must be on the exam while the others can >>> get >>> lost >>> . >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > lpi-examdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev >
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
