I want to clarify my statement. I was a little sweeping because you ended up doing a bunch of work IMO to convert the appliance, re-configure with more resources etc.
This is not plug + play by my book, though may be easier than configuring CENTOS if you don't do much Linux. So if you just load the appliance as is on VMWare Player or VMWare Server 1 (or whatever - not ESX), I think my point is correct - it doesn't have the HD space, or RAM for more than a basic demo. One other thing - in my opinion, you really will end up needing to become a Linux person to get far with Zenoss, and in that case, I think learning a more common linux distro like CENTOS or debian base is better. The other thing that will help a bunch is learning Python, which I am slowly doing. But if you try and use Zenoss as a black box, I think you'll either want a support contract with someone, or you'll get quite frustrated (based at least on my personal experience and these forums). -- James Pulver Information Technology Area Supervisor LEPP Computer Group Cornell University dbuck wrote, On 2/26/2009 6:33 AM: > First i must admit I'm not a Linux-Professional. > > First I install fresh ZenossCore with Stack-Installer on a fresh installed > Ubuntu 8.04-Server in a VMWare GSX. After a long Time the system works well > with a few Devices. Then I added ~40 Firewalls (with Performance-Monitoring) > and ~40 Cisco Routers (only Ping). After this the Zenoss (last 2.2.4 Version) > hangs randomly and MxSQL crashes. I spend some Time (inclusive Zenoss-Forum) > to fix the Problem but have no luck. > > I decided to try the VMWare Appliance on a GSX-Server. After a few ajustments > (for example I added a new HDD with more Space and mount it in /home/zenoss > and copy all files and directories under to it) anything works fine. When we > implement VMWare I3 I convert and place the Appliance on our ESX-Server. I > will be able to let the Appliance growing. Now I have 47 Firewalls with > Performace, 45 Cisco-Routers with only Ping and 18 Win2003 Servers. I Upgrade > the Appliance to 2.3.3 now. It works fine for me for now 5 Month without an > error. I plan to add another 35 Win2003-Server with performance-Monitoring. > > Appliance or Full Version? > I think it depends on how much Performance- and Service-Monitoring you want > to add, not only on the number of Devices. > Important is to Plan what you want to monitor. Only monitor things you realy > need for your work. > > And it depends on how much resources from host you give the Appliance. For > Example I give 2 CPUs and 2GB RAM to it and it works with CPU-Performance > max. 10%, Mem-Performance max. 15% > > I must speak against jmp242. His statement is too sweeping. The Appliance is > not for Demo. For those who are not Linux-Experts it is easy to use, easy to > setup and with rpath easy to update/upgrade. In my case I haven't the time to > setup Linux and fix all the packet-dependencies-and configure-problems like > "when you want this, install that and that and ..., make sure you have > configure this and that ..." to make it work. > > In my opinion one thing against the Appliance is, that I don't know the > limits of the Appliance. So I Think this Question maybe answer someone from > the Zenoss-Team. > > Dietmar > > > > > -------------------- m2f -------------------- > > Read this topic online here: > http://forums.zenoss.com/viewtopic.php?p=31719#31719 > > -------------------- m2f -------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > zenoss-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users _______________________________________________ zenoss-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users
