Subject: Re: Gborg still down

From: "Dave Page" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 20:41:00 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joshua D. Drake [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: 21 April 2006 20:05
> To: Magnus Hagander
> Cc: Marc G. Fournier; Jim C. Nasby; Dave Page; 
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Gborg still down
> 
> 
> > Because it makes more sense monitoring internet services from 
> > *outside* the hosting network? ;-)
> 
> Well of course :) That's what we do. We have a server that 
> sits somewhere else entirely that does our nagios.
> 
> My main point was it seems that this is something hub should 
> be invovled in sense a lot of the core servers are hosted by hub.

Most of the servers are not hosted by hub these days - we have them
pretty well distributed around the world these days.

Regards, Dave

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:15:00 -0700

> pretty well distributed around the world these days.

I would be happy to add our nagios server to the monitoring mix. Just 
let us know what you would like us to monitor and who should be notified.

Joshua D. Drake

> 
> Regards, Dave
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
> 
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
> 

-- 

            === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
      Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
      Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
                     http://www.commandprompt.com/

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:16:45 -0300 (ADT)

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> I would be happy to add our nagios server to the monitoring mix. Just let us 
> know what you would like us to monitor and who should be notified.

Just please don't put me onto your auto-page list again ... the last time, 
I spent more time looking at false positives ... actually, they were all 
false positives :(

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [email-masked]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 13:18:36 -0700

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Just please don't put me onto your auto-page list again ... the last 
> time, I spent more time looking at false positives ... actually, they 
> were all false positives :(

We don't do ICMP monitoring anymore, nor do we do monitoring off that 
old network.

We only do service level monitoring and I was assuming they would get 
sent to different individuals based on what server it was.

J

--

---

From: "Jim C. Nasby" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:45:31 -0500

> pretty well distributed around the world these days.

Well, wherever they're hosted monitoring has been an issue for as long
as I can remember. Search not getting updated, list archives not
updated, sites down, etc.

If individuals hosting these various services aren't monitoring them
adequately then the project itself should be monitoring them. Plus
there's servers/services that I suspect won't get monitored very well by
their owners (mirrors come to mind...)
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      [email-masked]
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:17:29 -0700

> updated, sites down, etc.

Well Search has been resolved as it was moved to us and has been kicking 
arse since then. Archives has not had any server side problems in longer 
then I can remember.

> their owners (mirrors come to mind...)

It may be helpful to understand that a lot of the servers are mirrors 
(like archives) and even if archives is doing just fine the source for 
archives may be having problems (which has been the case).

Joshua D. Drake

--

---

From: Dave Page <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 09:01:48 +0100

> their owners (mirrors come to mind...)

As we already said, we do monitor them. However, we monitor that they are
running - ie. Do we get a response from Apache, ssh, rsyncd or whatever.
Checking whether the archives/search are serving up to date content would be
a whole other (difficult) problem altogether.

Regards, Dave

---

From: "Jim C. Nasby" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 13:19:58 -0500

> a whole other (difficult) problem altogether.

ISTM it wouldn't be that difficult if whatever updated the archives
stuffed the current time in a file somewhere once it was finished...

BTW, lest it sound like I don't appreciate the work of everyone who
keeps the various sites up, I do. But it hurts our credibility everytime
someone can't get to one of our sites, or the archives are out of date,
or search doesn't work, etc., etc. I know there's been some big
improvements made recently; I'm just hoping that we can get monitoring
setup for everything that's currently not being monitored.
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      [email-masked]
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461