On 07/22/11 09:44, Paul Graydon wrote:
> On 7/22/2011 2:29 AM, Adam Moskowitz wrote:
>> Paul Graydon wrote:
>>> Hopefully with a good wide spread of interest and talents we could
>>> finally get a monitoring tool that doesn't actually suck!
>> And what color pony do you want with that?
>>
>> Seriously, given the incredibly wide range of applications, situations,
>> SLAs, services, constraints, conditions, and requirements, I think the
>> idea that a single tool will solve everyone's problems is, well, nothing
>> short of ludicrous.
> By making /everything/ modular and extensible, and having the monitoring
> platform be a framework which individual components are natively plugged
> in to, everything from data collection, to presentation, reporting or
> responding . That's what the proposal seems to boil down to. It's
> something we're sadly lacking with most monitoring solutions that I've
> ever seen. It's almost entirely 'their way or the high way', with a few
> bolt-ons on the side, fudged into place just to get by (with all the
> unreliability and risk that implies)
Then you end up with HP OpenView...
ugh
--
END OF LINE
--MCP
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
