On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 7:33 PM Andrew Bogott <abogott(a)wikimedia.org
On 2/25/19 12:06 PM, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 6:40 PM Giovanni Tirloni
<gtirloni(a)wikimedia.org <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>> wrote:
If we poke roles in the firewall so Icinga can reach the
VMs and we
define the monitoring::service stuff in Puppet, is that all
we need to
shutdown Shinken? Do you think there would be any concerns
I'm not sure, what checks does shinken do ATM that we'd need to
port over to icinga? Right off the bat it seems simpler to me to
fire up a icinga stretch VM and move over the checks and their
puppetization to that VM instead, what do you think?
One of the reasons we haven't done this already is that WMF
production monitoring seems to be in constant flux -- it's
disappointing to adopt a monitoring tool only to have it
deprecated a month later in production. Is the current version of
icinga that's running in prod actually your desired final state
there, or is something else up and coming?
Yes I can confirm that the current icinga+stretch combo in production
is what we'll stay on. I think there's consensus that icinga is
showing its age, however the project of replacing icinga (or even
deciding not to!) AFAIK isn't formally on the radar, IOW production
icinga deprecation (if any) is many quarters out.
Ok! So, in that case, icinga-on-a-VM seems like the obvious move to
me. Giovanni, does that suit you OK?