New Question
 
 
PRTG Network Monitor

Intuitive to Use.
Easy to manage.

200.000 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


PRTG Cluster: What happens to historical data when a cluster node goes offline for some time?

Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

We use netflow and SNMP metrics for monthly billing reports. If my master node drops offline for 2 days (or 2 hours or whatever time frame) and then comes back online, will there be a gap in the data for that time it was offline or will it update it's database with data collected by one of the other nodes?

If not how do we generate accurate billing reports without gaps in the records? What if both proves in a 2-way cluster are down for different time periods? How to we avoid a reporting gap then?

cluster-setup clustering historic-data prtg storage

Created on Aug 11, 2010 11:28:11 AM by  Dirk Paessler [Founder Paessler AG] (10,869) 3 4

Last change on Apr 15, 2019 10:30:20 AM by  Maike Behnsen [Paessler Support]



13 Replies

Accepted Answer

Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Each node manages its own storage for historic data. If a node goes offline the node will have a gap in its data (and in graphs and tables).

When you run the "historic data" function or if you create a report for a sensor you have the choice to work only with the data of "one node" or "all nodes". When "all nodes" is selected you will see data tables with the results of all sensors.

The current version does not yet have a method to combine data from several nodes into one dataset (by filling in data of other nodes into gaps of the primary node) (but that should come soon). Currently you would have to look at the tables yourself and apply corrections manually.

See Also

Created on Aug 11, 2010 11:34:18 AM by  Dirk Paessler [Founder Paessler AG] (10,869) 3 4

Last change on Jun 26, 2012 3:40:05 PM by  Daniel Zobel [Paessler Support]



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

I had exactly the same question. The main reason for using the failover scenario would be so there are no gaps in the reports (which makes you lose money or look unprofessional)

Im a little sad to read this as its the main reason we wanted to deploy the failover scenario. Just like the OP posted, to have the billing reports without downtime holes. Everyone needs to reboot Win Servers, after updates, that leaves minute gaps in the reports. I hope v8 will be able to combine the reports.

Created on Aug 28, 2010 7:26:12 PM by  Volker Weiterer (20) 1



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

I have version PRTG Network Monitor 13.3.4.2605, it is important to my not have gaps in the graph, in which version is going away to be able to synchronize the data? or to combine data from several nodes into one dataset

I hope v13.3 will be able to combine the reports

Thanks in advance

Created on Jul 31, 2013 7:34:33 PM by  iquevedo (21) 1



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

I'm very sorry, synchronization of monitoring data between cluster nodes is not planned in the moment. So far the requests for this are very very low. For more details, on How We Rate Your Feature Requests, please see this article by our CEO.

Created on Aug 1, 2013 12:12:09 PM by  Torsten Lindner [Paessler Support]



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Dear paessler team, I join the request. It is required cluster's functionality to take SLA reports and historical data with no gaps. I hope you will consider this request. Thank you.

Created on Jan 13, 2016 6:37:34 AM by  DmitriyS (20)



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

I also want to add my request for this option. We cannot deliver a report that has gaps in it. And since we already had to forget the offloading of data to another system (an earlier request by mail), we surely need this as an option.

Created on Jan 26, 2016 2:46:08 PM by  Gemeente Enschede (180) 1



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

+1

Hi Paessler Team, this feature is much needed for operation center environments where contiguous data reports are needed. It does not look good at all with gaps in data or if "manual" corrections are needed, especially if we are monitoring thousands of nodes.

This feature would benefit anyone using the failover cluster feature, more so towards those needed to send many reports to clients & other business units. Managed Service Providers will love this.

Without this data sync feature between master & slave nodes, as others previously have mentioned, reports will look unprofessional and not taken seriously. E.g having to explain to customer which gaps are caused my node down, which are caused by failover, etc. PRTG is after all supposed to be a simple to operate tool yet powerful.

Appreciate if you guys bump this up on your roadmap!

Created on May 23, 2016 1:29:58 AM by  bash1001 (20)



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hello Peassler Team,

Our environment uses a master(virtual)-slave(physical) cluster config with remote nodes.

I also, would appreciate a high priority for this feature, full data sync between master and slave !. Maybe a virtual ip adress can be used 10.10.10.1 (virtual monitor access) 10.10.10.2. (master) 10.10.10.3. (slave) to access the monitored environment, regardless witch node (master/slave) is available, with synced data.

With regard, DB.

Created on Sep 7, 2017 8:58:07 AM by  ict-HHN (20)



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hey there,

Actually, there are still no plans to implement this feature into PRTG requests for this are still very low.

Kind regards,
Sven

Created on Sep 7, 2017 10:25:07 AM by  Sven Roggenhofer [Paessler Technical Support]



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

+1 Not sure how many requests will be needed until Paessler will consider this for future version feature. For us, we have to purchase a different software license for billing and reporting purpose simply because we do not have sync database between Master and Failover node after maintenance.

Created on Oct 3, 2017 12:30:56 AM by  Bowen Guan (20) 1



Votes:

2

Your Vote:

Up

Down

Hey Bowen,

Please refer to the blog-article from our CEO which explains the way we handle feature requests at Paessler.

Kind regards,
Sven

Created on Oct 4, 2017 6:16:18 AM by  Sven Roggenhofer [Paessler Technical Support]



Votes:

1

Your Vote:

Up

Down

+1 Feature would be appreciated

Created on Mar 16, 2018 10:52:30 AM by  Dieter M (10)



Votes:

0

Your Vote:

Up

Down

+1 Feature would be appreciated. This feature should be implemented as well as a High Availability feature, giving the IP address to the slave when the master is down.

Kind regards, Philippe

Created on Feb 25, 2019 3:46:31 PM by  Philippe Gagnon (0)



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.