Last week, Floyd Strimling wrote a post on Why Monitoring Sucks, which got a decent amount of attention. While the overall origin of the meme is not that old, the industry paradigms it encompasses and the underlying truths it highlights have been around for decades. Monitoring doesn't suck more/less than any other IT discipline, it's more than simply collecting performance statistics, pinging devices for availability, or sending out meaningless alerts to overworked system administrators.
For far too long, hardware manufacturers, independent software vendors, and even internal IT organizations have treated IT monitoring as an afterthought. While virtualization, provisioning, and orchestration get all the hype, monitoring is stuck within a reactive paradigm built on expensive legacy proprietary frameworks, cobbled together open source projects, expensive niche tools, or cheap downloadable solutions that offer flash with not much substance.
To make matters worse, IT monitoring is susceptible to the ‘monitor everything’ syndrome that produces gigabytes of data and yields very little tangible results measured by statistics such as MTTR or SLAs. What it does yield is a scenario whereby IT is stuck with an abundance of disparate frameworks, solutions, elemental management systems (EMS) and tools that are expected to work together to create the mythical single-pane-of-glass.
Join Zenoss as we investigate Why Monitoring Sucks and the implications of continuing down this path within today’s new paradigms of cloud computing, programmable datacenter, or the software defined datacenter. Zenoss will provide answers to why monitoring sucks and we will introduce the 7 Stages of IT Monitoring Grief:
When: Wednesday, October 3rd, 1pm (CST)