Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Ganglia vs Zabbix: What are the differences?
Ganglia vs Zabbix
Ganglia and Zabbix are monitoring systems commonly used to collect and analyze data from various resources in a computer network. While both tools serve the same purpose, there are key differences between them that make them suitable for different use cases.
Ease of Deployment: Ganglia is known for its simplicity in terms of deployment as it uses a decentralized architecture. The monitoring nodes in Ganglia can be easily added or removed without affecting the overall system. On the other hand, Zabbix has a more centralized architecture which requires a dedicated server for deployment, making it more complex to set up and maintain.
Scalability: Ganglia is well-suited for large-scale environments as it can support a high number of nodes and metrics. It utilizes efficient multicast and unicast communication protocols to handle large amounts of data across a distributed system. Zabbix, on the other hand, is more suitable for small to medium-sized environments due to its centralized design. It may face scalability challenges when dealing with a large number of nodes or metrics.
Real-time Monitoring: Ganglia excels in providing real-time monitoring capabilities. It leverages a hierarchical design and a modular approach to achieve low-latency data collection and reporting. This makes it ideal for scenarios where real-time data visualization and analysis are critical. On the contrary, Zabbix focuses more on historical data analysis and trend prediction rather than real-time monitoring, making it better suited for long-term analysis and planning.
Alerting and Notification: Zabbix offers a robust alerting and notification system that allows users to set up and customize triggers based on specific conditions. It can send alerts through various channels such as email, SMS, and instant messaging, ensuring timely response to critical events. While Ganglia provides basic alerting capabilities, it lacks the comprehensive alerting features and flexibility that Zabbix offers.
User Interface: Zabbix provides a feature-rich and intuitive web interface that offers a wide range of visualizations, graphs, and reporting tools. It allows users to create custom dashboards and drill down into specific metrics for detailed analysis. Ganglia, on the other hand, has a simpler and more lightweight web interface, focusing primarily on visualizing and aggregating metrics rather than providing advanced reporting and customization options.
Ecosystem and Integration: Zabbix has a larger and more active community, resulting in a vast ecosystem of plugins and integrations with other systems. This enables seamless integration with popular third-party tools and services, such as ticketing systems, version control systems, and cloud platforms. Ganglia, although it has a smaller community, also offers integration capabilities but may not have the same extensive support as Zabbix.
In summary, Ganglia and Zabbix differ in terms of deployment simplicity, scalability, real-time monitoring capabilities, alerting and notification system, user interface features, and ecosystem and integration options. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements and priorities of the organization or system being monitored.
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!
I work at Volvo Car Corporation as a consultant Project Manager. We have deployed Zabbix in all of our factories for factory monitoring because after thorough investigation we saw that Zabbix supports the wide variety of Operating Systems, hardware peripherals and devices a Car Manufacturer has.
No other tool had the same amount of support onboard for our production environment and we didn't want to end up using a different tool again for several areas. That is the major strong point about Zabbix and it's free of course. Another strong point is the documentation which is widely available; Zabbix Youtube channel with tutorial video's, Zabbix share which holds free templates, the Zabbix online documentation and the Zabbix forum also helped us out quite a bit. Deployment is quite easy since it uses templates, so almost all configuration can be done on server side.
To conclude, we are really pleased with the tool so far, it helped us detect several causes of issues that were a pain to solve in the past.
Centreon is part of the Nagios ecosystem, meaning there is a huge number of resources you may find around in the community (plugins, skills, addons). Zabbix monitoring paradigms are totally different from Centreon. Centreon plugins have some kind of intelligence when they are launched, where Zabbix monitoring rules are configured centrally with the raw data collected. Testing both will help you understand :) Users used to say Centreon may be faster for setup and deployment. And in the end, both are full of monitoring features. Centreon has out of the box a full catalog of probes from cloud to the edge https://www.centreon.com/en/plugins-pack-list/ As soon as you have defined your monitoring policies and template, you can deploy it fast through command line API or REST API. Centreon plays well in the ITSM, Automation, AIOps spaces with many connectors for Prometheus, ServiceNow, GLPI, Ansible, Chef, Splunk, ... The polling server mode is one of the differentiators with Centreon. You set up remote server(s) and chose btw multiple information-exchange mechanisms. Powerful and resilient for remote, VPN, DMZ, satellite networks. Centreon is a good value for price to do a data collection (availability, performance, fault) on a wide range of technologies (physical, legacy, cloud). There are pro support and enterprise version with dashboards and reporting. IT Central Station gathers many user feedback you can rely on both Centreon & Zabbix https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/centreon-reviews
We highly recommend Zabbix. We have used it to build our own monitoring product (available on cloud -like datadog- or on premise with support) because of its flexibility and extendability. It can be easily integrated with the powerful dashboarding and data aggregation of Grafana, so it is perfect. All configuration is done via web and templates, so it scales well and can be distributed via proxies. I think there also more companies providing consultancy in Zabbix (like ours) than Centreon and community is much wider. Also Zabbix roadmap and focus (compatibility with Elasticsearch, Prometheus, TimescaleDB) is really really good.
Hi Vivek, what's your stack? If huge monitoring bills are your concern and if you’re using a number of JVM languages, or mostly Scala / Akka, and would like “one tool to monitor them all”, Kamon might be the friendliest choice to go for.
Kamon APM’s major benefit is it comes with a built-in dashboard for the most important metrics to monitor, taking the pain of figuring out what to monitor and building your own dashboards for weeks out of the monitoring.
Pros of Ganglia
Pros of Zabbix
- Free21
- Alerts9
- Service/node/network discovery5
- Templates5
- Base metrics from the box4
- Multi-dashboards3
- SMS/Email/Messenger alerts3
- Grafana plugin available2
- Supports Graphs ans screens2
- Support proxies (for monitoring remote branches)2
- Perform website checking (response time, loading, ...)1
- API available for creating own apps1
- Templates free available (Zabbix Share)1
- Works with multiple databases1
- Advanced integrations1
- Supports multiple protocols/agents1
- Complete Logs Report1
- Open source1
- Supports large variety of Operating Systems1
- Supports JMX (Java, Tomcat, Jboss, ...)1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Ganglia
Cons of Zabbix
- The UI is in PHP5
- Puppet module is sluggish2