WebOps-related mailing lists have always had a problem with this vague term, and I suspect that commercial vendors exploit this confusion. 🙂
Wikipedia gives a pretty vague definition:
“…is the process of testing or tracking (monitoring) how end-users interact with a website or web application.”
People use the term to describe lots of things that pertain to the web:
I wish I knew of a better way to disambiguate the term in an easy way. I suspect that the tools listed above will always use the word ‘monitoring’ in their descriptions. Sigh.
Relatedly, I have the opinion that the three different functions listed above should be performed by different pieces. I’ve yet to see any tool that sucessfully combines health-check/alerting with resource trend/graphing, for example. I don’t have much experience with GroundWork or Zabbix, maybe folks who do can argue with me on that point. 🙂
Indeed. I usually use the term monitoring when referring to server and netwrok health checking but I also see the term applied to the other options. Most people I know use it do define graphing tools.
The BayLISA Monitoring SIG, which has been meeting for over a year now, classified Monitoring functionality into these four areas:
It isn’t perfect, but it was the best we could do after much discussion and deliberation and hemming and hawing. (For example, do “Aggregation” and “Notification” deserve separate mention, or are they functionally a subset of one of the above?)
So one of the upcoming goals of the SIG is to map popular monitoring tools against these classifications. Obviously, some straddle more than one.