New Question
 
 
PRTG Network Monitor

Intuitive to Use.
Easy to manage.

300.000 administrators have chosen PRTG to monitor their network. Find out how you can reduce cost, increase QoS and ease planning, as well.

Free PRTG
Download >>

 

What is this?

This knowledgebase contains questions and answers about PRTG Network Monitor and network monitoring in general. You are invited to get involved by asking and answering questions!

Learn more

 

Top Tags


View all Tags


Large Scale Installation & Dependencies / Notifcations

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

For large installations, if you were to follow the below:-

https://kb.paessler.com/en/topic/2733-how-can-i-speed-up-prtgespecially-for-large-installations

You are told to do a few things and one of which is to Avoid dependencies. We have just migrated to 2 powerful core servers as we don't have the ability to deploy remote probes (mainly Linux based systems) so our cores are doing most of the legwork.

How much does not having dependencies help? We monitor hundreds of remote networks and ideally we'd have several for each. Currently my inbox is getting hundreds of notifications daily as one router dying is sending notifications for itself and then the 4 switches / 36 access points behind it as well.

dependencies notifications prtg

Created on Feb 16, 2017 4:51:11 PM by  sparish (0) 1



Best Answer

Accepted Answer

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear sparish

A core server using physical hardware is usually good for 10,000 sensors. This is a practical estimation for a typical PRTG installation using a lot of ping and SNMP sensors, as well as some WMI-based and other sensors. This also implies that a device has its ping sensor dependency setting set to "Master object for parent".

In most practical cases, you can go somewhat beyond 10,000 sensors while keeping good performance. At this point it depends more on the PRTG setup than on the performance of the hardware. (Your servers are good enough, better specs will not get you any real performance improvement.)

Created on Feb 20, 2017 12:35:12 PM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]



9 Replies

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear sparish

Dependency checks take CPU time and they need to create a read-lock on the device tree, blocking write accesses onto that tree during the check.

Please clarify, how large is your setup? How many sensors do you use and on what machine (physical or virtual, number of logical CPU cores, RAM)?

Created on Feb 17, 2017 1:20:29 PM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi,

We're talking about 7000 sensors, soon to be much more. Currently we mainly use PRTG to ping most of the equipment in our remote sites using http sensors / scripts, but I am going to start rolling out more advanced monitoring for places it may be useful (SNMP). So I would expect this number to be many times larger

We have 2 Physical Core XL1 servers, which are both:-

Intel Xeon E5 series CPU (12 CPU cores, 24CPU threads) 32GB RAM 4 x 250GB Solid State Disks RAID 10 array ~ 470GB usable space Windows 2012 R2

The load will be spread across both, how would you manage notifications without dependencies in large deployments?

Created on Feb 20, 2017 10:59:26 AM by  sparish (0) 1



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear sparish

Before I can give a useful reply, please clarify "load will be spread across both" – do you plan to use two independent core server, or a cluster/failover solution?

Created on Feb 20, 2017 11:55:18 AM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi,

Two independent core servers, we'll use the Enterprise console to be able to see them both at the same time without having to go to two URLs.

For us, it made the most sense as we have a local and remote backup for both machines, so in the case of hardware failure we'll be up and running in a few hours.

Created on Feb 20, 2017 12:13:10 PM by  sparish (0) 1



Accepted Answer

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear sparish

A core server using physical hardware is usually good for 10,000 sensors. This is a practical estimation for a typical PRTG installation using a lot of ping and SNMP sensors, as well as some WMI-based and other sensors. This also implies that a device has its ping sensor dependency setting set to "Master object for parent".

In most practical cases, you can go somewhat beyond 10,000 sensors while keeping good performance. At this point it depends more on the PRTG setup than on the performance of the hardware. (Your servers are good enough, better specs will not get you any real performance improvement.)

Created on Feb 20, 2017 12:35:12 PM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi,

Related to the above, I am looking at using dependencies to reduce the barrage of notications after a device goes offline as we're going to have several sensors per device. As a test I have a router, hypervisor and VM being monitored. Each is it's own device under one group with multiple sensors per device and following best practices, each device has a simple sensor such as ping / port that I have set as the master object with a 60 sec scanning interval (the others have a higher scanning interval).

This means that per device I will only get one notification if there is an error, which is great but I can't seem to set the device's dependencies once it has a sensor set as the master object. If my router dies, I only want one notification saying my router is dead not 3 saying my router, hypervisor and VM are dead, as I am aware the other 2 will be dead if my router is missing. In this example it is only saving 2 notifications being sent but in a network with 72 access points & 6 switches sat behind the VM, we're talking about 81 notifications when that router drops. How do I get a device to depend on another device, when it has a sensor set as the master object?

Created on Feb 22, 2017 12:11:17 AM by  sparish (0) 1



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear sparish

You could create a group, move the devices there, and set the master object for that group to a specific ping sensor.

Created on Feb 22, 2017 2:06:25 PM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hi,

Thanks for the reply. It seems a little odd, that if on a device I have a master sensor in order to pause the others, that device can no longer depend on another device. In my above scenario, the only way to get around that would be to create a group for every device that has other devices depending on it? That would mean a group for every device and then another for each group of AP's that depend on a different switch. It's not deal breaking, it's just extra work and I was wondering why? I can understand it may be difficult to visualise what exactly I mean, so if it's easier I can send a support email instead with a diagram.

Created on Feb 22, 2017 2:36:19 PM by  sparish (0) 1



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear sparish

To keep the dependency path clear, we don't allow multiple dependencies. Overall we think that the benefits outweigh the cons.

In principle, you could disable the "master object for parent" setting and set the same ping as master for all three devices which should then be paused. But this way you don't get individual device pausing.

Created on Feb 22, 2017 4:36:54 PM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]

Last change on Feb 22, 2017 4:37:20 PM by  Arne Seifert [Paessler Support]



Please log in or register to enter your reply.


Disclaimer: The information in the Paessler Knowledge Base comes without warranty of any kind. Use at your own risk. Before applying any instructions please exercise proper system administrator housekeeping. You must make sure that a proper backup of all your data is available.