Nagios Core Reviews

We use Nagios for network monitoring of our devices. All devices are listed on Nagios, which alerts us if they are running properly or if there is a shutdown or any issues like a network break. Alerts are generated, and we receive notifications via email or SMS.

Monitoring with Nagios Core is helpful because it provides immediate alerts if something goes down, such as a server, or wireless router, or if there's a cable break. This allows us to respond promptly to any issues.

It effectively monitors our computers, including their disk space, processor usage, and temperature.

The interface could be improved.

I have been using Nagios Core for ten years.

The product is stable.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

300 users are using this solution. If the device is increased, we will increase it.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

For any problem, we Google it to easily find a solution.

Integrating mobile device notifications with Nagios Core, such as through Core SMS, is challenging.

It takes a while to set it up but once set up, it is very reliable. Deployment takes one to two hours to complete.

I rate the initial setup a six or seven out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

We receive timely alerts for any breakdown or shutdown. Without them, we wouldn't know about issues until users complain. With Nagios' alert system, we receive notifications before users even notice a problem. 

I highly recommend it to system administrators and network administrators. Nagios Core makes life easier with email and SMS alerts, ensuring you stay informed and can address issues promptly

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use Nagios to monitor networking infrastructure and services.

The most valuable feature depends on the project. It's great if you need to check to ensure a service is running 24/7. I can use the full solution for free, and it's flexible. If I need to add a dashboard, I can integrate it with Nagios. Cloud synchronization is wonderful.

The mapping is a little hard.

I've been using Nagios Core for three to five years.

Nagios is 100 percent stable.

Nagios is appropriate for companies of all sizes, but a larger enterprise might require a bigger IT team. The largest team I've seen was 50 people. You can easily scale Nagios up, but I've never done it. 

Nagios support is good. They also have a complete knowledge base, so if you need to figure something out, you can find everything about the solution in one place.

I used Pandora about seven years ago, so I can only speak about the capabilities of the solution as it existed at the time. Pandora was excellent, but the documentation was too complicated.

It depends on infrastructure, but normally Nagios is easy to deploy, and I could do it by myself. It usually takes two or three days, but I needed a week for one deployment. You need to install and configure everything and deploy the agents on various servers.

After deployment, you need to do periodic updates and patching. You download the latest pack from the Nagios server with the client. You can do an ATT update depending on if you have Red Hat or Windows between the platforms.

We use Nagios for one of our customers to monitor all the servers, firewalls, routers, and cameras. While monitoring the server we get alerts, this enables us to raise a ticket and notify end users that we are aware of the issue before they need to notify us.

We have 80 people using the dashboard and getting the alerts. Depending on the number of servers, routers, and firewalls we are monitoring in current clusters. When one cluster goes down, it will automatically take data from another cluster. 

We support 24/7 because our client is a financial company, if the critical servers go down, they would face financial issues. 

The features of Nagios Core that we find most valuable are the plugins we use, we can check the uptime and see how many servers and routers and create groups accordingly. From these groups, we can check how many servers and routers go down. 

We also like the alerting features. One of the dashboards they provide monitor total assets and how many are up and how many are down.

If we need to process quicker, we use third party plugins to avoid downtime.

Nagios Core would benefit from aggregations if a particular server goes down. 

Comparing Nagios UI and Nagios Core, in Nagios Core we need to do some coding while Nagios XI has everything in UI. If you go with Nagios XI the developer task is minimized because they help provide the UI. With Nagios Core, we need to log into the Linux servers and we need to change that particular directory. We need to write a code for each and every server.

I have been working with Nagios Core for two years.

We deploy Nagios on a cloud, so there are features like plugins. The help desk tickets plugins so we can monitor the lock files as well from main server and create dashboards.

The security-related features also are there to monitor antivirus and install or not on each and every server. 

We were working with ELK. Due to costing we switched to Nagios Core because it is free for the alerting feature. 

The initial setup of Nagios Core is straightforward. We installed as per the steps mentioned in Nagios' documentation. It can be deployed in a day.

I completed the installation myself.

Most of the features in Nagios Core are free. Most plugins are free. 

When considering Nagios Core you should consider how many servers, firewalls and routers you need to monitor. Then determine which services need to be monitored by Nagios Core and how many service alerts are needed so you can create clusters and keep your gig size and RAM size accordingly.

I would rate Nagios Core a 7 out of 10.

We use Nagios to monitor hundreds of CentOS cloud servers (and a few Legacy Windows servers). Nagios is monitoring well over 5000 service endpoints. Some plugins were handwritten in PHP, Perl, Python, Java and Bash.

It has made the life of the network operations staff more proactive in managing the resources of the infrastructure. It prevents disasters long before they can take place.

• Historical Alert records/data
• Plugins
• Data sources (MySQL)
• Grouping of services and servers

We use the Alerting and Graphing to minimize the downtime. The old RRD Graph module is now used by Grafana. We outgrew the old PNP4Nagios a few weeks back. 

The GUI of the Core is still a long way off, but the features are 100 percent above average. It would be great to see better UI themes which could be configured by Netadmin or instructions that help combine graphs and Nagios.

I have never had stability issues. Nagios has been stable for over 10 years. Although, we never left it running for more than two weeks without uploading new services, plugins, and threshold changes, then restarting it..

No scalability issues, though it is a bit slow due to latency. However, after tweaking the Nagios and off-loading the graphing to NPCD, I was able to scale the Nagios to more than 5000 services checks with 0.5s latency.

The end-users love quick alerting and Grafana dashboards.

We did not previously use a different solution. Nagios was the first solution that we started using 10 years ago.

Since its Nagios, it is a bit time consuming, but worth the effort. It took a few hours setting up the entire environment, including RRD, PHP, Apache, Nagios, PNP4Nagios, Perl, Python, OpenSSL, etc.

We did an in-house installation.

We have saved a lot of time, money, and effort in reducing disaster times, which is owed to Nagios quick alerting.

The Nagios Core (PNP4Nagios + Core) is free and can be setup by Netadmin within a few hours. The only additional cost is the cloud server. 

10 years ago, there were not too many options.

There are thousands upon thousands of plugins. This is a winning product. Nothing can match the plugins, even I have contributed about six plugins.

Our primary use case for this solution is an APM for application performance monitoring. For example, we deployed the solution on-premises so we could observe the solution. We look at the threats at the web containers, the data source, and all these components under this monitoring.

The application performance monitoring feature is valuable. We primarily use it for user experience monitoring and determining which layer the problem happened to resolve it.

The initial setup process could be improved.

We have been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable but we are still familiarizing ourselves with tool and have not scaled largely yet.

We do not have experience with customer service and support.

The initial setup process could be easier. For example, the setup for infrastructure monitoring is straightforward, but in the case of application monitoring, it is more complicated.

We primarily implement through vendor teams.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the initial setup process could be easier. I recommend the solution to users who want a more diverse environment for monitoring.

It's monitoring all of our production environment and alerting us to any issues that might pop up.

The benefits are that it's free and it allows us to monitor all of our production. So it gives us a comfort level of knowing that if there is a problem that pops up, we get notified.

• GUI interface
• Notification capabilities
• Real-time reporting

In terms of any further features, that would bump us into their paid product. For what we get and what we use, and all the libraries that are available, it's pretty robust.

However, for the version we're using, making it a little easier to configure and set up from the start would help. There are multiple layers that you have to wade through to be able to set it up, to do it the right way, and to get it to do what you want it to do.

It has been rock solid.

So far, it has met our needs. As far as I know, from reading blogs and the like, it can go to many more servers and even multiple data centers. It seems like it's pretty scalable.

Tech support has been pretty good. There have been a couple of occasions where we've had to pick up the phone and call, and for the most part, they are very prompt, very quick, very responsive.

I had used this solution before and there wasn't anything in place here that was any good, so it was a no-brainer for me.

My most important criteria when selecting a vendor are 

• flexibility
• supportability
• scalability.

I set the whole thing up. It wasn't complex, it was just that I had to do a lot of planning. If you follow your plan then you won't end up in trouble. If you deviate from the plan, you are going to have trouble.

We have the ability right now to see and create reports to tell whether or not we're meeting our SLAs on our production servers, through it. That is something that we wrote and implemented as a plug-in.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10 because it's relatively easy to implement and the cost is great, it's free.

My advice would be, save yourself a lot of time - go get it and install it.

We mostly use Nagios Core to integrate with Python and Bash Script. If there is a requirement from the client to monitor these services, and Nagios Core does not have the features, we integrate Python and Bash Script with Nagios Core to monitor the services.

Nagios Core does not have a graphic display.

My company has worked with Nagios Core for the last six years.

I rate Nagios Core ten out of ten for stability.

I rate Nagios Core ten out of ten for scalability.

Nagios Core's initial setup was not difficult for me.

Nagios Core is a cheap solution.

Nagios Core is a world-famous open-source monitoring tool. It is easy for us to showcase a Nagios Core demo to the client.

Overall, I rate Nagios Core ten out of ten.

I use Nagios Core for basic monitoring of my systems and services.

What I like about Nagios Core is that it helps me ensure everything is running smoothly by checking the status of hosts and services.

I have found Nagios Core to be challenging in terms of its centralized architecture and configuration complexities, especially in a Microsoft environment. Making optimizations or changes often requires reinstalling the server, which can be inconvenient.

I have been using Nagios Core for over a year.

It is a very stable product. I would rate the stability as a seven out of ten.

Nagios Core is limited in terms of distributed setups, and there is no central view for remote data centers. However, it is scalable in sizing, allowing for easy updates and upgrades without much complication. Just need to adjust settings in the software during the process. I would rate the scalability as a six out of ten.

I have worked with Centreon in my organization as well.

The installation of Nagios Core was relatively straightforward with no major complexities. My team managed to install it within a day. Maintaining it is straightforward for us. We don't do frequent updates; it is a one-time install. The only ongoing task is occasional security adjustments, mainly related to access control. 

I would recommend Nagios Core for CentOS organizations, especially for simpler evaluations or smaller projects where a significant investment isn't required. It is suitable for those without extensive monitoring needs. Overall, I would rate the solution as a six out of ten.