X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5AF59DD923; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:55:33 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 45238-05; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:55:34 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.88]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4349DD927; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:55:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from mailgate.vale-housing.co.uk ([194.217.48.34] helo=vale-housing.co.uk) by anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1ExsQu-0006z7-1U; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:55:32 +0000 Received: from 192.168.7.8 ([192.168.7.8]) by ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk ([192.168.1.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:55:32 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.1.051004 Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:55:52 +0000 Subject: Re: Infrastructure monitoring From: Dave Page To: Josh Berkus , Magnus Hagander CC: "Marc G. Fournier" , John Hansen , , "Jim C. Nasby" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] Infrastructure monitoring Thread-Index: AcYZTOeSJh2BnoVAEdqebgARJHpWaA== In-Reply-To: <200601141217.12780.josh@agliodbs.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.338 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.338] X-Spam-Score: 0.338 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200601/101 X-Sequence-Number: 9289 On 14/1/06 20:17, "Josh Berkus" wrote: > People: > >> I assume you talk about the nagios monitoring? Or are there perhaps even >> now multiple sets of monitoring? (Dave has a nagios installation up at >> least). > > For those of you who haven't seen Hyperic, think of Nagios with a fancy web UI > including notification management, scheduled tasks, historical reporting, and > specific monitioring tools for PostgreSQL databases and other common > applications. As a comparison, Nagios::Hyperic --> ed::vi or > amanda::Arkieka Which is all very nice but what would any of those features give us that we have any use for? Regards, Dave.