[cacti-announce] Cacti 0.8.6j Released (fwd)

Jason LeBlanc jml at packetpimp.org
Mon Jan 22 13:20:24 UTC 2007

Anyone thats seen MRTG (simple, static) on a large network realizes that 
decoupling the graphing from the polling is necessary.  The disk i/o is 
brutal.  Cacti has a slick interface, but also doesn't scale all that 
well for large networks.  I prefer RTG, though I haven't seen a nice 
interface for it, yet.

Chris Owen wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> On Jan 21, 2007, at 11:35 PM, Travis H. wrote:
>> That is, most of the dynamically-generated content doesn't need to be
>> generated on demand.  If you're pulling data from a database, pull it
>> all and generate static HTML files.  Then you don't even need CGI
>> functionality on the end-user interface.  It thus scales much better
>> than the dynamic stuff, or SSL-encrypted sessions, because it isn't
>> doing any computation.
> While I certainly agree that cacti is a bit of a security nightmare, 
> what you suggest may not scale all that well for a site doing much 
> graphing.  I'm sure the average cacti installation is recording 
> thousands of things every 5 minutes but virtually none of those are 
> ever actually graphed.  Those that are viewed certainly aren't viewed 
> every 5 minutes.  Even if polling and graphing took the same amount of 
> resources that would double the load on the machine.  My guess though 
> is that graphing actually takes many times the resources of polling.  
> Just makes sense to only graph stuff when necessary.
> Chris
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
> iD8DBQFFtE/NElUlCLUT2d0RAtbeAJ91qMtm8VtWSLHJ/gLsg3DnqitlwQCeK1pn
> bqmZZoK821K76KMj/0bxDNk=
> =Rx6P

More information about the NANOG mailing list