Xymon v5 readiness 🔗 link

  On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 01:50:04PM +1000, Jeremy Laidman wrote:

Henrik

I'm working on the imminent deployment of some new monitoring servers,
perhaps within the next 2 months.  For this roll-out, IPv6 is on the list
of highly-desirable features.  While Xymon v4.x has an extensive feature
list, I'm prepared to live with more basic functionality for some time, if
it's reliable enough on the core features (disk/mem/cpu client reporting to
central mode servers, ping and some simple network tests).  If we can bring
online a range of more advance features that are present in 4.x, in the
next 6 months, then that would be acceptable.  As we'll have redundant
(independent) Xymon servers, we'll be able to do some beta testing on one
of the servers.

Would you recommend I stick with v4.x, or is the v5.x (trunk) reliable
enough in its core feature set to be worth a little extra potential pain
for a little while?  Or perhaps hedge bets and use v5.x on only one of the
Xymon servers?

Can anyone report on their experiences with v5.x?

Cheers
Jeremy

-- 

Den 28-05-2014 07:24, Christian Herzog skrev:

Good morning all,

we're pretty much in the same situation: in dire need of a IPv6 capable
monitoring solution and waiting for v5.
I extensively tested xymon-4.3.99-20130812 and it worked pretty well. The only
faulty test was LDAP. It's also considerably faster than 4.3.x, so we'd be
happy to deploy anytime now. Since then there's been talk of a xymonnet
rewrite, but I don't know the status and I'm not aware of any more recent
test versions.

HTH,
-Christian


  On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 01:50:04PM +1000, Jeremy Laidman wrote:

Henrik

I'm working on the imminent deployment of some new monitoring servers,
perhaps within the next 2 months.  For this roll-out, IPv6 is on the list
of highly-desirable features.  While Xymon v4.x has an extensive feature
list, I'm prepared to live with more basic functionality for some time, if
it's reliable enough on the core features (disk/mem/cpu client reporting to
central mode servers, ping and some simple network tests).  If we can bring
online a range of more advance features that are present in 4.x, in the
next 6 months, then that would be acceptable.  As we'll have redundant
(independent) Xymon servers, we'll be able to do some beta testing on one
of the servers.

Would you recommend I stick with v4.x, or is the v5.x (trunk) reliable
enough in its core feature set to be worth a little extra potential pain
for a little while?  Or perhaps hedge bets and use v5.x on only one of the
Xymon servers?

Can anyone report on their experiences with v5.x?

Cheers
Jeremy

the version that Christian has tested works pretty well. The LDAP
problem is on the "to-do" list, and the only other major issue is with
trend graphing of web content-checks (the rrd-files are not being updated).

I don't know if Christian tested IPv6, but since the actual changes to
support IPv6 are fairly simple, I would not expect a lot of problems
specifically in that area.

In other words, if you need IPv6 - go grab the current "trunk" version.
It includes the new xymonnet code that Christian mentions (he's been
testing it, so I thought he knew it was in already ...)

On a related note, it is obvious that the current development/release
model does not work. I suspect I will simply be cleaning up the current
trunk code and release it more or less "as is" and then fix bugs / add
features / handle regressions in smaller sub-releases.

On 30 May 2014 19:43, Henrik Størner <user-ce4a2c883f75@xymon.invalid> wrote:

In other words, if you need IPv6 - go grab the current "trunk" version.