Sensu vs Telegraf: What are the differences?

Introduction

Sensu and Telegraf are both monitoring tools used in IT infrastructure management. They have several key differences that set them apart from each other.

1. Installation and Deployment: Sensu uses a client-server architecture where a Sensu server is installed on a central server and agents are deployed on each monitored system. Telegraf, on the other hand, follows an agent-based architecture where the Telegraf agent is installed on each system to be monitored. This difference in architecture affects the complexity and scalability of the monitoring setup.

2. Metrics Collection: Telegraf focuses primarily on collecting and processing metrics. It offers a wide range of input plugins to collect data from various sources such as system metrics, network devices, databases, and more. Sensu, on the other hand, is more focused on event-driven monitoring and allows the execution of custom scripts and handlers to gather and react to events. This difference makes Sensu more suited for complex event-driven monitoring scenarios.

3. Monitoring Paradigm: Sensu follows a monitoring paradigm based on checks, subscriptions, and handlers. It allows the creation of checks to monitor system health and define subscriptions to group systems for monitoring purposes. Handlers can be used to react to events triggered by checks. Telegraf, on the other hand, follows a plugin-driven approach where the desired metrics are configured using input plugins and output plugins are used to send the collected metrics to various monitoring systems or storage backends.

4. Alerting and Notification: Sensu provides native support for alerting and notification. It allows the configuration of alerting rules based on check results and supports integrations with popular notification tools like PagerDuty, Slack, and email. Telegraf, on the other hand, does not have built-in alerting and notification capabilities. It primarily focuses on collecting metrics and relies on external tools or systems for alerting and notification purposes.

5. Community and Ecosystem: Sensu has been around for a longer time and has a larger and more mature community compared to Telegraf. The community around Sensu actively contributes plugins, integrations, and extensions, making it easier to find solutions and share knowledge. Telegraf, although backed by InfluxData, is relatively newer and has a smaller community. However, it benefits from being part of the broader InfluxData ecosystem, which includes other tools like InfluxDB and Chronograf.

6. Integration with Other Monitoring Systems: Sensu is designed to integrate with a wide range of monitoring systems and tools. It provides native integrations with popular systems like Graphite, InfluxDB, Nagios, and more. Telegraf, being part of the InfluxData ecosystem, is tightly integrated with InfluxDB and Chronograf. It offers seamless integration with InfluxDB for storing and visualizing the collected metrics, making it a good choice for those already using InfluxDB and other InfluxData tools.

In summary, Sensu and Telegraf differ in their installation and deployment approaches, focus on metrics collection versus event-driven monitoring, monitoring paradigms, built-in alerting and notification capabilities, community support, and integration with other monitoring systems. Both tools have their strengths and weaknesses, and the choice between them largely depends on the specific monitoring requirements and existing infrastructure.