Universal Monitoring Crimes and What to Do About Them - Part 1
May 22, 2018

Leon Adato
SolarWinds

Share this

Monitoring is a critical aspect of any data center operation, yet it often remains the black sheep of an organization's IT strategy: an afterthought rather than a core competency. Because of this, many enterprises have a monitoring solution that appears to have been built by a flock of "IT seagulls" — technicians who swoop in, drop a smelly and offensive payload, and swoop out. Over time, the result is layer upon layer of offensive payloads that are all in the same general place (your monitoring solution) but have no coherent strategy or integration.

Believe it or not, this is a salvageable scenario. By applying a few basic techniques and monitoring discipline, you can turn a disorganized pile of noise into a monitoring solution that provides actionable insight. For the purposes of this piece, let's assume you've at least implemented some type of monitoring solution within your environment.

At its core, the principle of monitoring as a foundational IT discipline is designed to help IT professionals escape the short-term, reactive nature of administration, often caused by insufficient monitoring, and become more proactive and strategic. All too often, however, organizations are instead bogged down by monitoring systems that are improperly tuned — or not tuned at all — for their environment and business needs. This results in unnecessary or incorrect alerts that introduce more chaos and noise than order and insight, and as a result, cause your staff to value monitoring even less.

So, to help your organization increase data center efficiency and get the most benefit out of your monitoring solutions, here are the top five universal monitoring crimes and what you can do about them:

1. Fixed thresholds

Monitoring systems that trigger any type of alert at a fixed value for a group of devices are the "weak tea" of solutions. While general thresholds can be established, it is statistically impossible that every single device is going to adhere to the same one, and extremely improbable that even a majority will.

Even a single server has utilization that varies from day to day. A server that usually runs at 50 percent CPU, for example, but spikes to 95 percent at the end of the month is perfectly normal — but fixed thresholds can cause this spike to trigger. The result is that many organizations create multiple versions of the same alert (CPU Alert for Windows IIS-DMZ; CPU Alert for Windows IIS-core; CPU Alert for Windows Exchange CAS, and so on). And even then, fixed thresholds usually throw more false positives than anyone wants.

What to do about it:

■ GOOD: Enable per-device (and per-service) thresholds. Whether you do this within the tool or via customizations, you should ultimately be able to have a specific threshold for each device so that machines that have a specific threshold trigger at the correct time, and those that do not get the default.

■ BETTER: Use existing monitoring data to establish baselines for "normal" and then trigger when usage deviates from that baseline. Note that you may need to consider how to address edge cases that may require a second condition to help define when a threshold is triggered.

2. Lack of monitoring system oversight

While it's certainly important to have a tool or set of tools that monitor and alert on mission-critical systems, it's also important to have some sort of system in place to identify problems within the monitoring solution itself.

What to do about it: Set up a separate instance of a monitoring solution that keeps track of the primary, or production, monitoring system. It can be another copy of the same tool or tools you are using in production, or a separate solution, such as open source, vendor-provided, etc.

For another option to address this, see the discussion on lab and test environments in Part 2 of this blog.

3. Instant alerts

There are endless reasons why instant alerts — when your monitoring system triggers alerts as soon as a condition is detected — can cause chaos in your data center. For one thing, monitoring systems are not infallible and may detect "false positive" alerts that don't truly require a remediation response. For another, it's not uncommon for problems to appear for a moment and then disappear. Still some other problems aren't actionable until they've persisted for a certain amount of time. You get the idea.

What to do about it: Build a time delay into your monitoring system's trigger logic where a CPU alert, for example, would need to have all of the specified conditions persist for something like 10 minutes before any action would be needed. Spikes lasting longer than 10 minutes would require more direct intervention while anything less represents a temporary spike in activity that doesn't necessarily indicate a true problem.

Read Universal Monitoring Crimes and What to Do About Them - Part 2, for more monitoring tips.

Leon Adato is a Head Geek at SolarWinds
Share this

The Latest

June 29, 2022

When it comes to AIOps predictions, there's no question of AI's value in predictive intelligence and faster problem resolution for IT teams. In fact, Gartner has reported that there is no future for IT Operations without AIOps. So, where is AIOps headed in five years? Here's what the vendors and thought leaders in the AIOps space had to share ...

June 27, 2022

A new study by OpsRamp on the state of the Managed Service Providers (MSP) market concludes that MSPs face a market of bountiful opportunities but must prepare for this growth by embracing complex technologies like hybrid cloud management, root cause analysis and automation ...

June 27, 2022

Hybrid work adoption and the accelerated pace of digital transformation are driving an increasing need for automation and site reliability engineering (SRE) practices, according to new research. In a new survey almost half of respondents (48.2%) said automation is a way to decrease Mean Time to Resolution/Repair (MTTR) and improve service management ...

June 23, 2022

Digital businesses don't invest in monitoring for monitoring's sake. They do it to make the business run better. Every dollar spent on observability — every hour your team spends using monitoring tools or responding to what they reveal — should tie back directly to business outcomes: conversions, revenues, brand equity. If they don't? You might be missing the forest for the trees ...

June 22, 2022

Every day, companies are missing customer experience (CX) "red flags" because they don't have the tools to observe CX processes or metrics. Even basic errors or defects in automated customer interactions are left undetected for days, weeks or months, leading to widespread customer dissatisfaction. In fact, poor CX and digital technology investments are costing enterprises billions of dollars in lost potential revenue ...

June 21, 2022

Organizations are moving to microservices and cloud native architectures at an increasing pace. The primary incentive for these transformation projects is typically to increase the agility and velocity of software release and product innovation. These dynamic systems, however, are far more complex to manage and monitor, and they generate far higher data volumes ...

June 16, 2022

Global IT teams adapted to remote work in 2021, resolving employee tickets 23% faster than the year before as overall resolution time for IT tickets went down by 7 hours, according to the Freshservice Service Management Benchmark Report from Freshworks ...

June 15, 2022

Once upon a time data lived in the data center. Now data lives everywhere. All this signals the need for a new approach to data management, a next-gen solution ...

June 14, 2022

Findings from the 2022 State of Edge Messaging Report from Ably and Coleman Parkes Research show that most organizations (65%) that have built edge messaging capabilities in house have experienced an outage or significant downtime in the last 12-18 months. Most of the current in-house real-time messaging services aren't cutting it ...

June 13, 2022
Today's users want a complete digital experience when dealing with a software product or system. They are not content with the page load speeds or features alone but want the software to perform optimally in an omnichannel environment comprising multiple platforms, browsers, devices, and networks. This calls into question the role of load testing services to check whether the given software under testing can perform optimally when subjected to peak load ...