[转载]开源网管软件对比 - Nagios OpenNMS Zenoss

542179528

摘自《Open Source Management Options》 ，原文作者Jane Curry.　　由于PDF里的表格我无法导出，所以下面的对比表格我用的是图片，也能看清，就是加载慢了点，还望见谅！
　　
　　Comparison of Nagios, OpenNMS and Zenoss
　　Necessarily,comparisons are based . a mixture of “fact” and “feeling” and you needa clear definition of what features are important to your environmentbefore comparisons can be valid for you.
　　Nagiosis an older, more mature product. It evolved from the NetSaint project,emerging as Nagios in 2002. OpenNMS also dates back to 2002 but feelslike the lead developer, Tarus Balog, has learned some lessons fromobserving Nagios. Zenoss is a more recent offering, evolving from anearlier project by developer Erik Dahl and emerging to the community asZenoss around 2006.

　　Allthe products expect to use SNMP OpenNMS and Zenoss use SNMP as thedefault monitoring protocol. They all provide other>　　All the products have some user management to define users, passwords and roles with customisation of what a user sees.
　　OpenNMSand Zenoss use RRD Tool to hold and display performance data; Nagiosdoesn't really have a performance data capability – Cacti might be agood companion product.

　　Mostsurprisingly, given that they all>　　Thereare advocates for and against “agentless” monitoring. Personally, Idon't believe in “agentless”. .ce you have got past ping then you haveto have some form of “agent” to do monitoring. The question is, shoulda management paradigm use an agent that is typically part of a boxbuild (like ssh, SNMP or WMI for Windows), or should the managementsolution provide its own agent, like Nagios provides NRPE (and most ofthe commercial management products come with their own agents). If yourmanagement system wants its own agents, you then have the huge problemof how you deploy them, check they are running, upgrade them, etc, etc.OpenNMS and Zenoss have a strong dependency . SNMP>　　Theother form of “agentless” monitoring basically comes down to portsniffing forservices. Whilst this can work fine for smallerinstallations, the nsquared nature of lots of devices and lots ofservices doesn't scale too well. All three products do port sniffing soit comes down to how easy it is to configure economic monitoring.
　　Feature comparisons
　　Thefollowing tables start with my requirements definition and compare thethree products . a featurebyfeature basis. (OOTB = OutOfTheBox).
　　Discovery

Availability monitoring

Problem management

Performance management

　　Product high points and low points
Nagios “goodies” and “baddies”
OpenNMS “goodies” and “baddies”

Zenoss “goodies” and “baddies”

　　Conclusions
　　What to choose? Back to your requirements!
　　Forsmallish, systems management environments, Nagios is well tested andreliable with a huge community behind it. For anything more than simpleping checks plus SNMP checks, bear in mind that you may need a way toinstall remote plugins . target hosts. Notifications are fairly easyto setup but if you need to produce analysis . your event log thenNagios may not be the best choice.

　　OpenNMS and Zenoss are bothextremely competent products covering automatic discovery, availabilitymonitoring, problem management and performance management andreporting. Zenoss has some topology mapping and has betterdocumentation but the code feels less>
　　My choice, hoping fervently that code>　　========
　　从这篇文章来看，Zenoss值得研究一下。OpenNMS前段时间研究过，上述的一些缺点我都有体会。
　　原文出自脚趾的博客