Richard Ortiz

Dependencies or Parent/Child Relationships

Recommended Posts

This would be extremely valuable! If a server is not able to be pinged for instance, if it could be set to suppress all other alerts for the device until it became accessible would greatly reduce alert spam.  Serversalive and others as mentioned have this capability.  Is their an official feature request form that can be submitted to from customers?

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have no idea how restrictive not having this feature is. How can someone hope to properly monitor their systems when the monitor has no proper hierarchical dependencies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to say this is on our road map.  I don't know much - in terms of how we'll configure it, the visuals, user experience, or timeline - but it will be one of the larger projects we focus on this year.  Keep the requests coming - especially any specifics in terms of which problems a feature like this may solve!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I'm happy to say this is on our road map.  I don't know much - in terms of how we'll configure it, the visuals, user experience, or timeline - but it will be one of the larger projects we focus on this year.  Keep the requests coming - especially any specifics in terms of which problems a feature like this may solve!

Hi Annie,

this is good news...

From my point of view: It would be nice to create dependencies between targets across servers of other objects like routers, switches etc.

Example: An application is running on server A where it's database is on server B. If we have a critical (or fatal) alert on the database, i would like to see that this will also impact the application object. Same thing when there is a critical alert on a server, this is most likely to impact anything that is running on this server.

Or, if I take it to a network level: If a router is going down, it will for sure impact all servers connected to this router (which will impact anything on these servers or depending on these)

In case this happens I would expect a target to get in a specified state (i.e. "related warning" or "related error"). Sending out alerts (for the childs) on this would not always be required as long as the original alert (i.e. networkswitch went down) is cleary indicating the impact based on the child relations. Or just an alert which refers to the original issue.

Kind regards,

Jeroen

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I'm happy to say this is on our road map.  I don't know much - in terms of how we'll configure it, the visuals, user experience, or timeline - but it will be one of the larger projects we focus on this year.  Keep the requests coming - especially any specifics in terms of which problems a feature like this may solve!

This is great news. From my part, I would like to see

  1. 1. Automatic network topology discovery, i.e., Logicmonitor would automatically scan the network and discover how devices are connected together and with what protocols. The information is partly there by just running nmap between every host.
  2. 2. Decent visualisation of the network topology, where you can zoom in on different parts of the network and navigate to a device's datssource easily
  3. 3. Decent management from the network topology visualisation, where you can click/search servers and say things like "everything connected to this machine by one node is now going into scheduled down time". I'm thinking regular expression matching would be really powerful in combination with this.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Clement. Nmap can help but also checking for CDP neighbours on devices or just set from gui.

A device can also have multiple parents. aka a core switch connected to two firewalls. if one goes down monitoring should not but both down = all hosts below affected.

At a minimum make this feature as a manually configurable feature ASAP with a longer term goal of automating it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this does not exist THIS IS A REQUIREMENT!!!!!! I have 100's of alerts at this point in time that can be triggered if something goes down in a key system. How is it that this monitoring system does not have this feature as of yet? for Managed Service Providers having the ability to squelch alarms when parent systems and or services go down is a de facto standard.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to hear this is on the road map! This is a really important feature for us as well. With the amount of objects we're monitoring it's important we know whether a network device at a location is down, or the gateway/MPLS to the entire location is down and at a glance that's not obvious. Cleaner alerting on this is very important to us.

Would love an update to see if this has moved any closer on the road map since last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is definitely movement.  We opted to solve the problem of drawing network and service maps first, as visualizing these relationships is step one.  That is underway, and dependencies are slotted to follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a long time user of Operations Center (formerly Managed Objects), this is the one thing I miss the most.  I've yet to encounter another solution that had the object relationship capabilities of Manage Objects.  Still, I don't need that level of sophistication at the moment, but any kind of dependency relationship between objects will go a long way to solving one of my biggest problems right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any update on an ETA on this?  It is one of various missing features that drives my potential clients to alternate solutions and it is very annoying to get a storm of alarms when only one real thing is wrong.

Thanks,
Mark

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2017 at 7:58 PM, Annie Dunham said:

There is definitely movement.  We opted to solve the problem of drawing network and service maps first, as visualizing these relationships is step one.  That is underway, and dependencies are slotted to follow.

 

Dependencies (manual, if needed) are more important than any automation. ...especially if it means waiting 6 more months while the complex automated dependency mapping is done.

Please, just get us dependencies.

Multiple "parents" is necessary, as well. (e.g., a VM is dependent on the Host on which it runs, the storage on which it resides, storage switches, upstream switches, etc.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LJ Bryson said:

 

Dependencies (manual, if needed) are more important than any automation. ...especially if it means waiting 6 more months while the complex automated dependency mapping is done.

Please, just get us dependencies.

Multiple "parents" is necessary, as well. (e.g., a VM is dependent on the Host on which it runs, the storage on which it resides, storage switches, upstream switches, etc.

 

Another aspect that is often missed:  If the parent is checked every 60 seconds, and the child goes offline, check the parent-path prior to alerting on the child.  I believe that Nagios works this way, but Zabbix does not (and it is a problem in Zabbix).

Also, with respect to multiple parent dependencies, this is primarily for alerting -- not for monitoring.  In other words, if a router goes down, only alert on the router (not the 300 hosts behind it).  But, still show the 300 hosts as offline/unavailable (perhaps gray, not red?).

Finally, device dependencies alone are not the end -- service dependencies are needed.  ie:

if host X is not pingable, then don't alert on the 30 other checks (including web checks) that are running on that host -- perhaps bundle the dependent alerts in the same 1 email as "affected dependent services."  Likewise, one MySQL goes down with 10 apache instances pointing at it for some web app -- alert on the DB, and include the list of other affected httpds in the same alert (with most critical first).

This would be even more powerful than Nagios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with LJ, automating the discovery of relationships between groups and devices is less of a priority for me than being able to manually define the relationships.  Automated relationship discovery is fine at the technical layer (device to device) but it won't discover the business level relationships between components, so it's far more important that we can define the business impacting relationships between objects.

Edited by Mosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.