[Xymon] Thought Process for Xymon Page Layout - Sanity Check

Thu Apr 5 21:39:50 CEST 2012

If you get to any size at all you will probably find it hard to put any
configuration together that will make sense to everyone.

I watch the non-green view, not the main view.  After all, most of us
(including me) can only look at one thing at a time.  The "critical
systems" view is a better version of the non-green view, but it is more
trouble to set up.  Once you get used to it, the non-green view looks
better and better all the time!

GLH

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Jamison Maxwell <jamison at newasterisk.com>wrote:

>  Currently, I’m with a rather small company with one site.  So, my page
> layout is pretty simple.  There are pages for production, development,
> network, storage, and external(DMZ).  In production systems Unix boxes are
> all together, we have few compared to Windows, and Windows boxes are
> separated by function, i.e. database, file, web, email.  Other pages are
> much the same way.  The only reason I separate Unix from Windows, though,
> is because I think that putting the Unix stuff, which uses certain columns,
> and the Windows stuff, which bbwin gives certain columns is ugly because of
> the empty test columns.  I use group-compress.****
>
> ** **
>
> Previously, I was with a rather large employer.  At that company, there
> were pages for sites, and then subpages like described above.****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Jamison Maxwell****
>
> Jamison at newasterisk.com****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* xymon-bounces at xymon.com [mailto:xymon-bounces at xymon.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steve Holmes
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 04, 2012 2:51 PM
> *To:* Ralph Mitchell
> *Cc:* Xymon Email List
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Xymon] Thought Process for Xymon Page Layout - Sanity
> Check****
>
> ** **
>
> Ralph,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. That sounds like an awful lot of work, though.
> Steve****
>
>   On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Ralph Mitchell <ralphmitchell at gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Steve,
>
> On your side-note - I needed to do pretty much the same thing, for a
> dog-n-pony presentation to management.  I don't know the *best* way to
> do it, but I got a second set of pages up by duplicating
> /home/xymon/server and changing a bunch of references in
> xymonserver.cfg in the copy to point to the copy structure.  Then I
> replicated the [xymongen] entry in the original
> xymon/server/etc/tasks.cfg and pointed ENVFILE to the copy.
>
> Some of the reports still pull up all the hosts, but the alternate
> all-non-green page only shows systems that are listed in the
> alternate's hosts.cfg.  If you have your systems split out into
> multiple files under hosts.d, you could just link the relevant file to
> the copy to avoid duplication of effort.
>
> I'm sure it can be done better, I just needed something *now* rather
> than *perfect*...
>
> As for ghost entries, I have a script that converts the ghost list
> into an "Unconfigured Client" page so that any new system shows up
> there within about 10 minutes of first checking in.  People in other
> groups were installing the client on a bunch of SuSE systems I don't
> have access to, and we're also installing the client as part of a RHEL
> kickstart from Satellite.
>
> Ralph Mitchell****
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Steve Holmes <sholmes42 at mac.com> wrote:
> > Don,
> > We have wrestled with the same issues. We started with systems organized
> by
> > OS (Unix/Windows) and then as more apps became multi-platform have moved
> > away from the platform centric organization, with some exceptions. The
> > reason for the change is so we can see at a glance when there is a
> problem
> > in a service we support so when there is a problem the customers for that
> > service can be notified, unless the problem is fixed before the customers
> > have to be notified (which is the big payoff with using Xymon).
> >
> > Our main page contains 3 groups:
> >
> >    Services
> >    Platform Support
> >    Infrastructure
> >
> > Under Services there are sub pages:
> > Production
> > Non-Production
> > Pre-production
> > Decommissioned
> >
> > Under Platform Support there is currently only:
> > Platform Windows Servers
> >
> > Under Infrastructure:
> >
> > Authentication
> > Network
> > Server Provisioning
> >
> >
> > Prod and non-prod each have a list of application/service areas as sub
> > pages, each of which is a list of hosts in logical groups with no respect
> > for OS platform. Within the groups the hosts are listed in alpha order.
> >
> > Pre-production contains hosts which are not in production yet, but will
> be
> > heading there (with some arm twisting at times). The reason for this is
> the
> > OPS center only calls support for alerts that show up on a production
> page.
> > Hosts in pre-prod (as well as non-prod) can fail without causing a call.
> >
> > Decommissioned is where we put host entries for hosts that are just
> that. We
> > keep them there for a year after they've gone off line in case someone
> wants
> > to see the history. They all have noconn and all the NOPROPS so they
> don't
> > show up anywhere else.
> >
> > The Infrastructure group is also production, but not application
> specific.
> > This is an area currently under development so it is incomplete. There we
> > have network devices, DNS servers, and the like.
> >
> > Platform Support was a special request from the Windows admins to group
> all
> > of the windows servers in one place (with duplicate entries) so they
> don't
> > have to look through all of the application pages to find their servers.
> The
> > Platform Windows Servers sub page contains sub pages for Prod and
> Non-Prod,
> > each of which is grouped by application area. Yes, this duplicates the
> work
> > I have to do when Windows systems are added, but they know that if they
> > don't tell me exactly where to put the duplicate entry it won't go in. We
> > could also put a page in there for Linux/Solaris admins, but that hasn't
> > been requested, yet.
> >
> > Many times when a new server shows up in the ghost report I have to ask
> the
> > admins for information about where it should go. Our naming convention
> > helps, but not totally.
> >
> > Side note: OPS likes to watch the all-non-green page. But that contains
> > non-green tests for non-prod as well as prod. I would really like to be
> able
> > to provide them with an all-non-green-prod-only (for lack of better
> > terminology) so they could easily see what they need to. Putting NOPROPS
> on
> > all non-prod would prevent the admins from being able to use the same
> page
> > to watch everything. Something I'm not willing to do.
> >
> > HTH
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Don Kuhlman <Don.Kuhlman at schawk.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi folks. I have been modifying our xymon server host cfg file setups.
>  I
> >> have been moving page layouts around.  I thought I would send a note to
> the
> >> list to see what others are doing in their web page layouts just to
> have a
> >> sanity check…
> >>
> >> Do you set up your main page to list things by OS, then by environment –
> >> like this:
> >> Unix -  then Prod, Dev, Test, Uat, etc.
> >> Windows – then Prod, Dev, Test, Uat, etc.
> >>
> >> Do you also use Application groups and then arrange them by OS and
> >> environment ?
> >> App1, Unix, Prod
> >> App1, Unix, Dev
> >>
> >> Or
> >>
> >> App1, Prod
> >> App1, Dev
> >>
> >> Here's what I've been doing and I'm having second thoughts about the
> logic
> >> of doing it this way:
> >>
> >> Main xymon page lists the following Pages
> >>
> >> Server lists by hostname Applications Infrastructure Other Systems
> >>
> >> Under Server lists by hostname – I have now made up UNIX-MAC and WINDOWS
> >> Under each of these I have PROD and DEV
> >>
> >> Under the Applications I have several business Applications -
> >> App1
> >> App2
> >> App3
> >>
> >> In each of the App1, App2, App3, I have Prod and Dev subpages
> >>
> >> I'm creating include files for each category – like HostsApp1Prod.cfg,
> >> HostsApp1Dev.cfg, HostsApp2Prod.cfg, HostsApp2Dev.cfg, etc.
> >> Now that I've changed it, I will probably need to create new
> >> HostsApp1ProdUnixMac.cfg, HostsApp1ProdWindows.cfg
> >>
> >> I would like to be able to setup base rules for monitoring the Prod &
> Dev
> >> systems – Prod disk, mem, cpu is different than Dev disk, mem, cpu, etc.
> >>  That's why I thought breaking out by OS and then environment would make
> >> sense.
> >>
> >> Then I want to create very specific service, process, or other
> monitoring
> >> for the application servers.
> >>
> >> Does this seem like a good way to go, or am I making it too complicated
> by
> >> breaking everything down this way?
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Don K
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > If they give you ruled paper, write the other way. -Juan Ramon Jimenez,
> > poet, Nobel Prize in literature (1881-1958)
> >
> > I prayed for freedom for twenty years, but received no answer until I
> prayed
> > with my legs. -Frederick Douglass, Former slave, abolitionist, editor,
> and
> > orator (1817-1895)
> >
> >****
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xymon mailing list
> > Xymon at xymon.com
> > http://lists.xymon.com/mailman/listinfo/xymon
> >****
>
>
>
>
> -- ****
>
> If they give you ruled paper, write the other way. -Juan Ramon Jimenez,
> poet, Nobel Prize in literature (1881-1958)
>
> I prayed for freedom for twenty years, but received no answer until I
> prayed with my legs. -Frederick Douglass, Former slave, abolitionist,
> editor, and orator (1817-1895) ****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xymon mailing list
> Xymon at xymon.com
> http://lists.xymon.com/mailman/listinfo/xymon
>
>

-- 
Disclaimer:  1) all opinions are my own, 2) I may be completely wrong, 3)
my advice is worth at least as much as what you are paying for it, or your
money cheerfully refunded.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.xymon.com/pipermail/xymon/attachments/20120405/37a71546/attachment.html>