Cacti vs Centreon

Overview

Cacti

Stacks89

Followers202

Votes10

Centreon

Stacks42

Followers84

Votes0

GitHub Stars136

Forks52

Cacti vs Centreon: What are the differences?

Key Differences between Cacti and Centreon

Cacti and Centreon are two popular network monitoring tools that offer various features for managing and visualizing network data. While they have some similarities, there are also key differences that set them apart.

Data Collection: Cacti collects data via SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) which allows it to retrieve various metrics such as bandwidth usage, CPU utilization, and memory usage from network devices. On the other hand, Centreon uses a combination of SNMP and plugins to collect data, giving it the ability to monitor a wider range of systems and applications.
User Interface: Cacti provides a user-friendly and intuitive web-based interface that allows users to create custom graphs and reports. It offers a drag-and-drop graph designer and a built-in graph preview feature. Centreon, on the other hand, offers a more comprehensive and sophisticated interface with a customizable dashboard, real-time monitoring view, and an event log for easier troubleshooting.
Alerting and Notification: Cacti lacks built-in alerting and notification capabilities, requiring users to integrate it with external tools for sending alerts. Centreon, on the other hand, includes a robust alerting system that supports various notification methods such as email, SMS, and SNMP traps. It also provides advanced alert management features like escalation rules and dependencies.
Scalability and Performance: Cacti is known for its lightweight and efficient architecture, making it suitable for small to medium-sized networks. Centreon, on the other hand, is designed for larger environments and can handle multiple data collectors and distributed monitoring setups, providing better scalability and performance.
Plugins and Extensions: Cacti has a large community-driven repository of plugins and templates that extend its functionality, allowing users to add new data sources and customize their monitoring environment. Centreon, on the other hand, offers a rich set of integrated plugins for monitoring various systems and applications, reducing the need for additional extensions.
Ease of Configuration: Cacti requires manual configuration of devices and data sources, which can be time-consuming for larger deployments. Centreon, on the other hand, includes auto-discovery and auto-configuration features that simplify the initial setup process and reduce the manual effort required.

In summary, Cacti and Centreon differ in terms of data collection methods, user interface, alerting capabilities, scalability, available plugins, and ease of configuration. The choice between these two tools depends on the specific needs and requirements of the network monitoring environment.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Cacti, Centreon

vivek

Jun 8, 2020

Needs adviceon

Centreon

Zabbix

Datadog

My team is divided on using Centreon or Zabbix for enterprise monitoring and alert automation. Can someone let us know which one is better? There is one more tool called Datadog that we are using for cloud assets. Of course, Datadog presents us with huge bills. So we want to have a comparative study. Suggestions and advice are welcome. Thanks!

796k views796k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Cacti	Centreon
Cacti is a complete network graphing solution designed to harness the power of RRDTool's data storage and graphing functionality. Cacti provides a fast poller, advanced graph templating, multiple data acquisition methods, and user management features out of the box.	It is a network, system, applicative supervision and monitoring tool. It is one of the most flexible and powerful monitoring softwares on the market; it is absolutely free and Open Souce.
Unlimited number of graph items can be defined for each graph optionally utilizing CDEFs or data sources from within cacti.;Automatic grouping of GPRINT graph items to AREA, STACK, and LINE[1-3] to allow for quick re-sequencing of graph items.;Auto-Padding support to make sure graph legend text lines up.;Graph data can be manipulated using the CDEF math functions built into RRDTool. These CDEF functions can be defined in cacti and can be used globally on each graph.;Data sources can be created that utilize RRDTool's "create" and "update" functions. Each data source can be used to gather local or remote data and placed on a graph.	Supervision of hybrid infrastructures, from one end to the other;Open and flexible architecture that fits your organization;Open-source solution, downloadable for free; The supervision of dynamic infrastructures, with ease
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 136
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 52
Stacks 89	Stacks 42
Followers 202	Followers 84
Votes 10	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 3 Rrdtool based 3 Free 2 Fast poller 1 Graphs from snmp 1 Graphs from language independent scripts	No community feedback yet
Integrations
RRDtool	Amazon RDS Amazon CloudFront Amazon ElastiCache AWS Lambda Azure Active Directory Cassandra Azure Storage Amazon S3 Azure Monitor Azure SQL Database

What are some alternatives to Cacti, Centreon?

Grafana

Grafana is a general purpose dashboard and graph composer. It's focused on providing rich ways to visualize time series metrics, mainly though graphs but supports other ways to visualize data through a pluggable panel architecture. It currently has rich support for for Graphite, InfluxDB and OpenTSDB. But supports other data sources via plugins.

Kibana

Kibana is an open source (Apache Licensed), browser based analytics and search dashboard for Elasticsearch. Kibana is a snap to setup and start using. Kibana strives to be easy to get started with, while also being flexible and powerful, just like Elasticsearch.

Prometheus

Prometheus is a systems and service monitoring system. It collects metrics from configured targets at given intervals, evaluates rule expressions, displays the results, and can trigger alerts if some condition is observed to be true.

Nagios

Nagios is a host/service/network monitoring program written in C and released under the GNU General Public License.

Netdata

Netdata collects metrics per second & presents them in low-latency dashboards. It's designed to run on all of your physical & virtual servers, cloud deployments, Kubernetes clusters & edge/IoT devices, to monitor systems, containers & apps

Zabbix

Zabbix is a mature and effortless enterprise-class open source monitoring solution for network monitoring and application monitoring of millions of metrics.

Sensu

Sensu is the future-proof solution for multi-cloud monitoring at scale. The Sensu monitoring event pipeline empowers businesses to automate their monitoring workflows and gain deep visibility into their multi-cloud environments.

Graphite

Graphite does two things: 1) Store numeric time-series data and 2) Render graphs of this data on demand

Lumigo

Lumigo is an observability platform built for developers, unifying distributed tracing with payload data, log management, and real-time metrics to help you deeply understand and troubleshoot your systems.

StatsD

It is a network daemon that runs on the Node.js platform and listens for statistics, like counters and timers, sent over UDP or TCP and sends aggregates to one or more pluggable backend services (e.g., Graphite).

Related Comparisons

Cacti vs Centreon: What are the differences?

Key Differences between Cacti and Centreon

Data Collection: Cacti collects data via SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol) which allows it to retrieve various metrics such as bandwidth usage, CPU utilization, and memory usage from network devices. On the other hand, Centreon uses a combination of SNMP and plugins to collect data, giving it the ability to monitor a wider range of systems and applications.
User Interface: Cacti provides a user-friendly and intuitive web-based interface that allows users to create custom graphs and reports. It offers a drag-and-drop graph designer and a built-in graph preview feature. Centreon, on the other hand, offers a more comprehensive and sophisticated interface with a customizable dashboard, real-time monitoring view, and an event log for easier troubleshooting.
Alerting and Notification: Cacti lacks built-in alerting and notification capabilities, requiring users to integrate it with external tools for sending alerts. Centreon, on the other hand, includes a robust alerting system that supports various notification methods such as email, SMS, and SNMP traps. It also provides advanced alert management features like escalation rules and dependencies.
Scalability and Performance: Cacti is known for its lightweight and efficient architecture, making it suitable for small to medium-sized networks. Centreon, on the other hand, is designed for larger environments and can handle multiple data collectors and distributed monitoring setups, providing better scalability and performance.
Plugins and Extensions: Cacti has a large community-driven repository of plugins and templates that extend its functionality, allowing users to add new data sources and customize their monitoring environment. Centreon, on the other hand, offers a rich set of integrated plugins for monitoring various systems and applications, reducing the need for additional extensions.
Ease of Configuration: Cacti requires manual configuration of devices and data sources, which can be time-consuming for larger deployments. Centreon, on the other hand, includes auto-discovery and auto-configuration features that simplify the initial setup process and reduce the manual effort required.

Cacti vs Centreon

Overview

Cacti vs Centreon: What are the differences?