This is probably something that I wouldn't use, as I don't really need it with my current setup (which is perfectly fine).
I assume that if this functionality was put in place that people who wanted to keep doing everything local (i.e. on one Xymon server machine) would be able to continue doing that with minimal necessary changes to the current setup? In other words, this would be parallel functionality that could be implemented if desired, but wouldn't necessary affect existing setups that are all local-based (or at least wouldn't affect them very much).
Is my assumption correct here?
That's my only concern with this, as it seems to be changing *a lot* of things. This would definitely be the preferred way if this functionally was implemented, especially for new users of Xymon who don't require this functionality and for users with smaller setups. Even some changes that would need to be made would be okay, as long as those necessary changes are explained.
Thanks.
-- Matt Vander Werf
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Galen Johnson <Galen.Johnson at sas.com> wrote:
It's not clear but I only have unidirection access to most of my monitored systems so I have to use xymonfetch. Would this still work where each datacenter server could be managed/communicate with a local instance that handles the alerts (for example)? I'm guessing this is so but just want to confirm. Sounds like I'm in a similar situation as Paul...
=G=
*From:* Xymon <xymon-bounces at xymon.com> on behalf of Root, Paul T <Paul.Root at CenturyLink.com> *Sent:* Saturday, November 28, 2015 4:57 PM *To:* 'Henrik Størner'; xymon-developer at lists.sourceforge.net; Xymon mailinglist *Subject:* Re: [Xymon] Xymon swarm proposal
I’m pretty much the customer for this. I have 3 xymon servers, 1 primary and 2 backup/proxy servers. With lots of firewalling between them. And with those, I have clients that are behind further firewalls.
Like J.C. related, I really want HA. Both proxies can get to all the same things. The primary is a separate network.
I could adapt to this swarm though. It would work pretty well, I think.
I would definitely want local and global non-green screens. Maybe something along the lines of the summary links that we currently have.
What about alerts.cfg? Would each machine have its own alerts.cfg, or could there be one centralized one?
Currently, I have one of the proxies monitor the primary, and if connectivity (or prog status etc.) is lost, it takes over the full alerts configuration.
Paul.
*From:* Xymon [mailto:xymon-bounces at xymon.com] *On Behalf Of *Henrik Størner *Sent:* Saturday, November 28, 2015 5:37 AM *To:* xymon-developer at lists.sourceforge.net; Xymon mailinglist *Subject:* [Xymon] Xymon swarm proposal
Hi,
the recent talk on xymon-developer about rewriting xymonproxy to support TLS, IPv6 and other good stuff made me think about other ways of scaling Xymon across large installations.
Which led me to the idea of having multiple independent Xymon servers - a swarm, because no one Xymon server depends on the others, but they can cooperate.
This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments.
Xymon mailing list Xymon at xymon.com http://lists.xymon.com/mailman/listinfo/xymon