[CentOS] Cacti/snmp question

[Les Mikesell]

Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 02:28:51AM -0700, John Doe wrote:
> 
>> I was able to make some plugins without too much problems (even discovered perl in the process)...
> 
> Agreed, it's easy enough to write Nagios plugins. I've done that too. 
> 
>> Then PNP will "automaticaly" plot these values... but yes, if you have n values, you will get n graphs...
>>
>>> someone writes a Nagios plugin that captures per-core CPU load
>> /proc/stat gives
>> cpuX  <user_ticks> <nice_ticks> <system_ticks> <idle_ticks> <uptime> <iowait> <irq> <soft_irq>
> 
> There's a python script claimed to be able to turn that to percentage here:
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=148781 - so adapting that to a
> Nagios plugin (which python's also fine for) could do it.
> 
> So PNP is just automagical? Aside from graphing each core separate, rather
> than a combined graph, it would do what I'm looking for without much special
> configuration? I got no sense of how to tie PNP in from its sparse docs.
> 
> In separate news, what I've learned is that Cacti _used to be able_ to do
> per-core CPU graphing, but the latest versions aren't comptible with the
> existing XML files for it - and no solution is on offer in their forum
> thread on this.
> 
> Monin has nice out-of-the-box graphs on other stuff, but not CPU per-core
> load.
> 
> Ganglia has per-core CPU graphing. There are RPMs in the Fedora repository,
> but at least for x64 there are a bunch of unmet dependencies (for CentOS
> anyhow). There are also older RPMs on Ganglia's own site. But the per-core
> CPU stuff is more recent, so I'll be building it from the tar to test it.

If have firewalling to protect from security issues, why not just run an older 
version of cacti?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com