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

Sat Apr 14 01:24:13 CEST 2012

Yes, that would be handy to have!

    ...Bruce

Bruce White
Senior Enterprise Systems Engineer | Phone: 1-630-671-5169 | Fax: 630-893-1648 | bewhite at fellowes.com | http://www.fellowes.com/

Disclaimer: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Fellowes, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: xymon-bounces at xymon.com [mailto:xymon-bounces at xymon.com] On Behalf Of Martin Flemming
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 1:49 AM
To: xymon at xymon.com
Subject: Re: [Xymon] Thought Process for Xymon Page Layout - Sanity Check

On Wed, 4 Apr 2012, Ralph Mitchell wrote:

> 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.

Hi, Ralph !

Thats sounds cool, is it possible to share this script ?

thanks & cheers

 	martin

>
> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Xymon mailing list
> Xymon at xymon.com
> http://lists.xymon.com/mailman/listinfo/xymon
>