[hobbit] Hobbit vs Nagios

[Hubbard, Greg L]

Henrik:

I heard a rumor that Nagios has an optional client that does not have to
be compiled.  Don't know if this is true, but it would sure help me out
if there was a "Perl-only" or "Perl+shell" client that I could use on
the one or two systems where I cannot install all the junk needed to
compile a Hobbit client binary.  Binary Perl distributions that just
drop in are usually available...  I know there would be a performance
hit, but I would rather have a more expensive-to-run client than no
client.

Thoughts?

GLH
-----Original Message-----
From: Henrik Stoerner [mailto:henrik at hswn.dk] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:33 AM
To: hobbit at hswn.dk
Subject: Re: [hobbit] Hobbit vs Nagios

On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 09:47:47PM -0400, Matthew Davis wrote:
> I tried out nagios and one huge winning factor for Hobbit was 
> simplicity.  I put quite a bit of time into getting nagios off the 
> ground with little luck.  And in the same amount of time, I was able 
> to get nearly all functionality I required out of a monitoring 
> program.

I had a funny experience last week. There was a Linux Users group
meeting here in Copenhagen, where the subject was "Setting up Nagios".
Since I'm always interested to see what the competitors look like, I
attended. The guy who told about Nagios knew that I am behind Hobbit, as
did a couple of the people in the audience. So when the talk about
Nagios was over and there was some spare time left, they asked me if I
could give a quick overview of Hobbit. Which I did, thanks to a wireless
Internet connection they managed to setup quickly.

After about an hour, someone in the audience asked the Nagios guy "after
hearing about Nagios and Hobbit tonight, why didn't you just install
Hobbit?"

I think that tells a lot about how easy it is to setup Hobbit compared
to Nagios.


Regards,
Henrik


To unsubscribe from the hobbit list, send an e-mail to
hobbit-unsubscribe at hswn.dk