On 6/14/2010 5:20 PM, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 03:55:10PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
I happen to like OpenNMS (http://www.opennms.org) but it is considerably more complicated than cacti to set up.
Thanks. I don't mind complicated if the documentation is clear. Cacti is in that fuzzy area where it's not quite simple, and the docs aren't quite clear (at least not to my learning style). It looks like OpenNMS is mostly in the same space as Nagios, which we're already happy with and have no motivation to replace.
The big difference is that OpenNMS typically needs no agent or per-host configuration because it works with snmp and auto-discovery of most services - and it handles routers/switches as well has hosts. It's actually not that hard to get started if you want to try it since you can use their yum repository and they just had a new stable release.
Would there be a stripped-down usage to just give us the per-core CPU usage graphs which are what we currently need (and have no notion how to add to Nagios, if it can even be done); does OpenNMS already have a per-core CPU usage graphing capability.
I'm not sure of the details of how this works. With the default setup I get a single CPU usage graph on linux targets and windows targets may show none or one per CPU. I think it is up to what the snmp agent returns.
And I think your SNMP server setup is the real problem. Do you get a response with snmpwalk using the same community name?
Yes, snmpwalk gives a good response. (Although to confuse things, the CentOS man page for snmpwalk is years out of date and doesn't present the current syntax - still, it has a current built-in help page.)
Does 'good' mean many pages of output if you don't specify an oid?