![]() ![]() In order to accomplish the goal of a single set of entities that allowed dynamic monitoring configuration (discovered from a configuration file), my plan was to replace these static configuration items (such as response time threshold) with variables. One thing to note is that the configuration defined in the URL probe is static, except for the actual URL, which is fed as a variable to facilitate multiple requests in a single Web Application Perspective. Monitors, which utilize the MonitorTypes, and Rules, which utilize the DataSource directly, are also created in accordance with the chosen configuration. Building from there, a set of MonitorTypes are created that depend on the URL Probe and implement ConditionDetection rules to expose state to Monitors. The URL Probe contains configuration items like the request header, the authentication settings, and a set of warning and error criteria. Then, a composite data source is created, consisting of a timer and an URLProbe from the Microsoft System Center Web Application Library. Firstly, two classes are created: one for the watcher node and one for the web application perspective, with a hosting relationship between the two. When you create a Web Application monitor in the SCOM GUI, a whole suite of management pack objects are created. I’ve described the Management Pack and development process below. I have completed this management pack, and I’m quite happy with it thus far. The key decision point in my design approach was that I wanted to be able to deploy a configuration file (in XML format) to each watcher node involved and define the URL’s and monitoring properties in that file. However, I wanted to take it a step further. While researching available options, I came across a post by Russ Slaten describing a way to utilize the Microsoft SystemCenter WebApplication Library implementation to accomplish a similar goal. I wanted to create a custom management pack to implement these monitors, with a minimal degree of configuration effort. In most cases, required web monitoring would entail monitors just for status code, reachability, response time, and perhaps some other checks like certificate validity. However, the administrative effort required to configure web application monitoring makes the implementation less than ideal for wide-scale basic web site monitoring. ![]() The native Web Application monitoring capabilities of SCOM are impressive to say the least, and provide excellent functionality for in-depth monitoring of complex web application transactions. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |