Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Possible next open source contribution: monitoring
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Possible next open source contribution: monitoring

jhjh Member

I wanted to create a free server resource monitoring platform for our server management customers to help predict when things are likely to go wrong. I looked at ServerDensity, Observium and NodeQuery but each had their pitfalls.

I spent the weekend learning Phalcon and produced something quite similar to NodeQuery and have a few trusted customers trying it out. It seems to work fine but needs some there are parts that need improving before it's used publicly. I will also be adding a unique feature: statistic predictions.

Before any public release, I would appreciate your opinion on whether it would interest you or not, and if so, whether you would want to use it as part of a hosted service, or a downloadable product (probably open source). If there's enough interest in either route, I'll package it up for that when I've finished the main release. The downloadable option would need some sysadmin knowledge to set up Phalcon.

Current state of play:
image

«1

Comments

  • cassacassa Member

    Cool, count me in as a tester :-)

  • Looks really nice. :D

  • I'd be interested in testing this. I'm a developer as well so I'd be more than happy to help with debugging and contribute code.

  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    said: I looked at ServerDensity, Observium and NodeQuery but each had their pitfalls.

    I spent the weekend learning Phalcon and produced something quite similar to NodeQuery

    So what were the pitfalls of NQ - sounds like they were minor since yours is quite similar...?

    Thanked by 1Mark_R
  • maybe you can add user login/logout acitvity,and invite me as tester please

  • It looks nice. Thanks to add me to the beta-tester list :-)

  • k0nslk0nsl Member

    I'm definitively interested in this.

  • jhjh Member

    raindog308 said: So what were the pitfalls of NQ - sounds like they were minor since yours is quite similar...?

    I really like NQ but when I tried it out there were lots of false positives and alerting was limited. Also I understand that the developer doesn't have a lot of time at the moment to continue its development.

  • Intrested on running this on my own.

  • Looks pretty neat! And yes, get quite a few 'down' false positives from NQ.

  • jhjh Member
    edited June 2014

    I've been busy coding today and I think it's ready for a public test.

    Could anyone interested in testing please fill out this very short form?
    https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1cjuZYlsGNVuoFYJDhmDyQyriKcGTbkXf5uqwFapzauw/viewform

    The last 2 questions are to help evaluate the best way forward for the software.

    @cassa @jrsmith @autoclick @nhocconan @k0nsl

    Thanked by 1k0nsl
  • cassacassa Member

    @jhadley said:
    I've been busy coding today and I think it's ready for a public test.

    Could anyone interested in testing please fill out this very short form?
    https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1cjuZYlsGNVuoFYJDhmDyQyriKcGTbkXf5uqwFapzauw/viewform

    The last 2 questions are to help evaluate the best way forward for the software.

    Sent ;) Let me know when I can test your project :-)

  • trexostrexos Member

    @jhadley

    Is a webserver needed for the server which gets monitored?

  • jhjh Member

    trexos said: Is a webserver needed for the server which gets monitored?

    No

  • Curious to see how this turns out :-), wouldn't mind giving it a go either.

  • trexostrexos Member

    @jhadley said:
    No

    awesome, handed my form in :)

  • wojonswojons Member

    @jhadley said:

    if you ever need some pointers on how to handle some weird things that can come up in monitoring please let me know. Since your planning on up sourcing them i dont mind giving out some ideas.

  • @jhadley Signed up on the Google form, hope to be testing soon ^.^

  • Form was submitted :-)

  • count me in for testing.

  • jhjh Member

    Really surprised at the amount of interest in this. I've sent out a second round of logins and will probably send out a third round this afternoon.

  • If you added Windows support that would be amazing!

  • trexostrexos Member

    @jhadley said:
    Really surprised at the amount of interest in this. I've sent out a second round of logins and will probably send out a third round this afternoon.

    didn't get anything :/

  • I'd be happy to test and maybe contribute if open-sourced on GitHub.

  • jhjh Member
    edited June 2014

    Just sent out a third round.

    trexos said: didn't get anything :/

    If you still haven't got it, PM me your email.

    Jono20201 said: if open-sourced on GitHub.

    Still not sure what avenue to take with this - depends on testing, spare time... :)

  • jhjh Member

    Quick update:

    • Applications: ServerMetrics now supports application monitoring. Sign in and add a web page that will be polled from servers around the world for TCP and HTTP response time.
    • Policies: The bare bones of policies are now in place. You can create custom rules to be alerted when a given set of conditions occur, to any of your applications or servers. In future, you will be able to scale your cloud services automatically given this data.
    • Increased limits: All tester accounts now come with 4 servers + 4 applications

    Also still accepting more beta testers.

    image

  • ztecztec Member

    Looks good. If you still need betatesters, I'll give it a go.

  • jhjh Member

    ztec said: If you still need betatesters, I'll give it a go.

    See the link at the top :)

  • @jhadley Thanks for the beta invite! Is there any objection to changing the cron from */5 to * for more often checks?

  • jhjh Member

    xDutchy said: Thanks for the beta invite! Is there any objection to changing the cron from */5 to * for more often checks?

    I wouldn't recommend it as it could break future functionality.

Sign In or Register to comment.