Blog post

Nagios : Let the religious wars continue

By Jonah Kowall | July 10, 2013 | 197 Comments

MonitoringIT OperationsECAAnalytics

I posted a write-up of “getting rid of” Nagios previously, and it’s generated a staggering number of responses by those who are attached to Nagios and have used it effectively. This has ignited a similar discussion to what you see in the Mac vs PC or *nix vs Windows discussions pervasive across the internet (complete with personal attacks, I thought we were all adults here…). Those who know me, know I’ve been there and done it in my past, and in speaking with thousands of users of monitoring tools over my time at Gartner I can share some common threads.

Many of the readers who commented on the story were managing hundreds of servers, this is typically not the size of enterprises I speak with (although sometimes we do speak with those groups). We often speaking with an enterprise or IT architect who is trying to homogenize the management of the IT landscape. This is not just servers, but applications, network devices, storage systems, and other components. If you do not treat your IT infrastructure with uniformity, the notions of industrialization and standardization are elusive.

The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse, and often managed in isolated groups. In the discussions with these isolated organizations, left to their own devices, have selected a wide array of tools to manage their infrastructure and applications. These tools overlap with other business units within the organization using similar or dissimilar tools. For example a client I spoke with last week had over 65 monitoring tools in place, the size of the environment was 75,000 servers, let alone a vast array of other components not in scope for phase 1. As you can imagine there was everything from Icinga, Nagios, Zabbix, Graphite, etc (on the open source front) to what we call the big-4: IBM, CA, HP, BMC, and even islands of VMware vCenter Operations Suite, Oracle Enterprise Manager, and Microsoft System Center Operations Manager. I tried to offer some prescriptive advice, but the task at hand was daunting to say the least. The CIO who created this project was responding to the massive cost of licenses and people the business was essentially wasting by not managing this centrally, and not leveraging it’s scale.

Nagios plays a big role in these organizations, often being implemented several different ways in a single enterprise. Trying to standardize the implementation is a challenge especially with most Nagios users selection various components from the open source and Nagios communities to build their personal preferred implementation. By utilizing aspects of open source the vendors who leverage Nagios, but build standardized ways of implementing and managing the footprint create a likely more successful implementation at scale. (EX: Centerity, Centreon, Groundwork, OP5, Opsview).

Additionally a common issue that is pervasive across monitoring is the over extension of the platform to do more than the core tenants of monitoring. The capture of metrics, notification of issues, and the analysis and correlation of metrics to determine root cause for problem isolation. Monitoring should not run jobs needed to operate and correct infrastructure, yet we see this happening consistently regardless of the platform. This creates lock in to the monitoring tool regardless of the vendor or technology used. When the business is forced to transform for example due to acquisition, new business demands, data center relocation, consolidation, or newer technology which enables easier management they are unable to detach the monitoring from the infrastructure or applications without extensive reverse engineering, which often times is not possible.

So I leave you with a question, how do you avoid these typical scenarios regardless of the tool in place?

Leave a Comment

197 Comments

  • NagiosUser says:

    I agree with you. But is there any better tool than Nagios XI at this price range???

  • Arie says:

    Good Question.

    It is not possible imho to avoid the situation you have mentioned.

    When one company takes over another one, and another one etc. Monitoring is not the question at that time. The It landscape can be completely different an fully incompatible.

    Getting a homo-gene IT landscape can require a complete redesign of this IT landscape’s, and monitoring. To avoid this (monitoring) as much as possible one has to look for a system than can grow with the landscape if needed (Opsview can do this), but.. does one know in advance how far this growing goes on? We do not. Facebook started on one server, now a few years further they need thousands to run their business.

    And why should infrastructure monitoring not take care of the correction of problems, as long as we are notified about those actions? In SCOM for example it is not only about monitoring your IT, but all-so about controlling it these days.

  • Jason says:

    I’ll toss two simple methods that are required to get any monitoring solution to work LONG term:

    1) Automation.
    2) Standard configurations.
    3) Community support

    Automation with chef/puppet/etc. is going to be a MUST if you want a large scale, solution that scales. That includes the automation of various servers and services on those servers. SO when “Tomcat” gets deployed to a server, the automation piece automatically picks it up and adds monitoring and alerting.

    Standards are required as well. A simple example is that if your “production” servers aren’t “tagged” as such in some way, it’s hard to automate and manage those servers. You can use a central management system, but often your automation solution starts taking ownership of that. For example, you’d tag a server as a “production” server, and then in your automation “all production servers get X monitoring for hardware”. But if you have “this is a one off server that’s not really production” that’s where things get nasty. And here’s the kicker – ANY monitoring solution has to have an API or easily to update configuration option.

    A last piece – COMMUNITY. I’ve seen a lot of closed source solutions that have HORRIBLE community support. And instead of making monitoring easy, these teams often will setup complicated monitoring configurations that end up not keeping up with the various product releases. This is the problem with the closed source monitoring solutions I’ve seen.

    An example here – MongoDB. The available monitoring tools for mongo from the community are all around for the various open source solutions (Zabbix/Nagios/Check_MK or OMD/etc. But it’s extremely difficult to find monitoring of this database in closed source solutions, because there’s no community around those solutions. If you’re core business runs on open source systems, look to open source technologies and community support. If ALL of your infrastructure is proprietary then it’s possible a closed source solution MAY work. But I’ve yet to seen an entirely closed source shop. Which means that an open source solution of some sort will almost always be easier to maintain than a closed source solution.

  • Paul Karman says:

    Hi Jonah,
    The answer seems to be in your story already. Standardization.

    I know standardization to be a difficult art. I know about this “beauty of standardization because you can pick any standard you like”. So for me warnings are in place, I do not take standardization lightly.

    To me standardization is the art of knowing what *not* to standardize. Sometimes I see a department that matured enough to understand we need standards but sometimes those standards do more harm then good. Instead of increasing productivity they put hard breaks on it.

    Is it practical to standardize everything up to the last bit if the end result is that no one has ever enough time or mental power to study all the standards before adding a metric in the correct way?

    Is it practical to standardize on a worldly level or even at company level when the standards are intended to improve cooperation between a team of 5 people?

    Are there not too many and not too few standards between different departments?

    Whatever monitoring tools one adopts, it seems to me that the right level of standardization determines success more then what bells and whistles are included in the software.

    Kind regards,
    Paul Karman

  • Bruno says:

    Jonah,

    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.

    Question 1

    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?

    Question 2

    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?

    Question 3

    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?

    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.

    My solution is as follows:

    > I would go for an open source solution and save half my budget.

    > I would hire a genius with the experience and expert know how to setup a single monitoring system with maybe a distributed architecture and provide whatever output people want to see.

    > I would appoint someone with great people skills to manage the outsourcing of the monitoring from the other teams and to manage business expectations whenever further functionality is needed.

    I am not sure what the above might cost but what I am sure off is that it isn’t a high price to pay especially when you take the licensing costs into account and the staff time spent setting up and maintaining those systems ( new checks, upgrades, etc )

    Although the above does not factor in the costs of consultants which my company will hire because they don’t trust their staff to do my job as a consequence of not being able to assess how technically able any of their them are.

    Centralize it, standardise it and revolutionise it!

  • Matt says:

    Nagios/Icinga is perfect for alerting.

    If you want to graph stuff, use graphite.

    If you want to alert on your graphs, use Skyline.

    Nagios is not a “one size fits all” and I have had far too much experience of systems which promise to roll up alerting, trending and visualisation into a “one size fits all” solution to know that it’s usually “one size fits nothing”

  • NagiosAbuser says:

    The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.

    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)

    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says “this way is new, so we should do that simply because newer is better,” and way behind the people that boast. “*my* way would toatally solve ALL your problems.” (becuse it won’t, and arrogance is ugly.)

    If we wanted to work in a one-way-fits-none, but-we’re-gonna-do-it-anyway world, we probably wouldn’t be working in IT.

    That being said, in my experience, here’s three ways to look at solutions:

    A.) How would I do it if money were no object? (Dream way..)
    B.) How would I do it if I were in my garage on my own servers? (Cheap way OR most fun way OR which way would I learn more…)
    C.) How would I do it if my job depended on it? (What’s the cheapest way I can do it *right*.)

    Since we don’t always lie in the dream state of life, B and C are WAY more common…and the way I’d do something if I had my druthers is almost NEVER the right way to do it in my enterprise.

    Fun thought to keep in mind.

    • Jonah Kowall says:

      Agreed on most of these counts, I’m just reflecting in my writing and research what I’ve heard more than enough times from clients. By adding lots of components and complexity into solving a basic problem (is my server healthy) we are over engineering stuff which matters less to the actual function of applications on that server. Simplify availability monitoring and focus on performance monitoring.

  • Fletch says:

    The real problem is that everyone wants something easy and ready to use out of the box. Windows, and the software that runs on it, does this very well. But with that, you have to put up with a lot of bloat from all the unnecessary addons and applications, as well as the parts that you might have needed which are missing. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write.
    Nagios is a base. That’s what you are missing. Kind of like Linux itself. You build onto it with the applications and resources that fit your needs. I’ve seen enough MSP software, to tell you that nobody makes a product that will satisfy everyone, and to get one that will satisfy you without doing it yourself, won’t happen, unless you have some VERY deep pockets. My advise to anyone reading this thread, learn *nix. Get familiar with its infrastructure, and open source applications. Contribute to the opensource community when you think you’ve found something that nobody else has thought of yet. It will save you and your clients money in the long run, and that is a good thing for everyone.
    I for one refuse to give the money I earn supporting my clients, to anyone else, just so I can sit on my ass and not have to do any work building my business. The way I provide support is proprietary, so my software solutions should be too. Throwing money at a problem until it goes away, is just lazy and wasteful.

  • Antony says:

    Surprisingly, peoples react to this post even the guy create this have left.

    There isn’t rocket science here.

    To pay and forget about it, goes IBM, that’s how DoD works, but you really need a deep pocket.

    Don’t want to spend a penny on it? goes for the freeware that most people using. It may not working now, but it will work in later. At the beginning, Apache does not support event-driven like Nginx, but the community made it happen.

    The out of the box solution would be: hired some good guys and pay them well to keep them in the company. Who need monitoring if the server never goes problems?

  • Thank you for your great article

  • In order to show you the most relevant results

  • سررسید says:

    we have omitted some entries very

  • similar to the 30 already displayed.

  • You know what? The real problem is that everyone wants something easy and ready to use out of the box. Windows, and the software that runs on it, does this very well. But with that, you have to put up with a lot of bloat from all the unnecessary addons and applications, as well as the parts that you might have needed which are missing. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write.

  • thanks. But with that, you have to put up with a lot of bloat from all the unnecessary addons and applications, as well as the parts that you might have needed which are missing. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write.

  • great article. you have to put up with a lot of bloat from all the unnecessary addons and applications, as well as the parts that you might have needed which are missing. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write.

  • you have to put up with a lot of bloat from all the unnecessary addons and applications, as well as the parts that you might have needed which are missing. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write.. thanks for you great atice

  • good. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write.. thanks for you great article

  • thanks for you great article. great great. People like me who have old enough know that nothing is easy or straight forward about computers, and you can’t have it all with any system or software you write..

  • وقف says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says “this way is new, so we should do that simply because newer is better,” and way behind the people that boast. “*my* way would toatally solve ALL your problems.” (becuse it won’t, and arrogance is ugly.)
    If we wanted to work in a one-way-fits-none, but-we’re-gonna-do-it-anyway world, we probably wouldn’t be working in IT.
    That being said, in my experience, here’s three ways to look at solutions:

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says “this way is new, so we should do that simply because newer is better,” and way behind the people that boast. “*my* way would toatally solve ALL your problems.” (becuse it won’t, and arrogance is ugly.)
    If we wanted to work in a one-way-fits-none, but-we’re-gonna-do-it-anyway world, we probably wouldn’t be working in IT.

  • آگهی says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says “this way is new, so we should do that simply because newer is better,” and way behind the people that boast. “*my* way would toatally solve ALL your problems.” (becuse it won’t, and arrogance is ugly.)

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says “this way is new, so we should do that simply because newer is better,” and way behind the people that boast.

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says

  • زمین says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done”

  • جوملا says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything,

  • شعر says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have,

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)

  • گمرکات says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do.

  • سیاسی says:

    great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum.

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.

  • Jonah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?
    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.
    My solution is as follows:
    > I would go for an open source solution and save half my budget.
    > I would hire a genius with the experience and expert know how to setup a single monitoring system with maybe a distributed architecture and provide whatever output people want to see.
    > I would appoint someone with great people skills to manage the outsourcing of the monitoring from the other teams and to manage business expectations whenever further functionality is needed.
    I am not sure what the above might cost but what I am sure off is that it isn’t a high price to pay especially when you take the licensing costs into account and the staff time spent setting up and maintaining those systems ( new checks, upgrades, etc )

  • onah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?
    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.
    My solution is as follows:
    > I would go for an open source solution and save half my budget.
    > I would hire a genius with the experience and expert know how to setup a single monitoring system with maybe a distributed architecture and provide whatever output people want to see.
    > I would appoint someone with great people skills to manage the outsourcing of the monitoring from the other teams and to manage business expectations whenever further functionality is needed.
    I am not sure what the above might cost but what I am sure off is that it isn’t a high price to pay especially when you take the licensing costs into account

  • onah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?
    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.
    My solution is as follows:
    > I would go for an open source solution and save half my budget.
    > I would hire a genius with the experience and expert know how to setup a single monitoring system with maybe a distributed architecture and provide whatever output people want to see.
    > I would appoint someone with great people skills to manage the outsourcing of the monitoring from the other teams and to manage business expectations whenever further functionality is needed.
    I am not sure what the above might cost but what I

  • onah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?
    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.
    My solution is as follows:
    > I would go for an open source solution and save half my budget.
    > I would hire a genius with the experience and expert know how to setup a single monitoring system with maybe a distributed architecture and provide whatever output people want to see.

  • onah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?
    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.
    My solution is as follows:
    > I would go for an open source solution and save half my budget.

  • onah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?
    These three questions tackle technology, finance and people all of which are part of the problem, of which I think the last 2 are the biggest problem.

  • onah,
    I think what you are seeing in these companies is not just a technology problem. Although I am not well versed in all the monitoring technologies out there I can abstract a solution by asking a few questions.
    Question 1
    What single tool is currently available on the market that could monitor all 75,000 servers that currently are being monitored by the 65 monitoring tools?
    Question 2
    How much money is that company willing to spend to resolve this problem?
    Question 3
    Are people willing to outsource monitoring from their teams into a central team?

  • Many of the readers who commented on the story were managing hundreds of servers, this is typically not the size of enterprises I speak with (although sometimes we do speak with those groups). We often speaking with an enterprise or IT architect who is trying to homogenize the management of the IT landscape. This is not just servers, but applications, network devices, storage systems, and other components. If you do not treat your IT infrastructure with uniformity, the notions of industrialization and standardization are elusive.thanks a milion for your great article

  • great article but: those groups). We often speaking with an enterprise or IT architect who is trying to homogenize the management of the IT landscape. This is not just servers, but applications, network devices, storage systems, and other components. If you do not treat your IT infrastructure with uniformity, the notions of industrialization and standardization are elusive.thanks a milion for your great article

  • great article but: those groups). We often speaking with an enterprise or IT architect who is trying to homogenize the management of the IT landscape. This is not just servers, but applications, network devices, storage systems, and other components. If you do not treat your IT infrastructure with
    Many of the readers who commented on the story were managing hundreds of servers,

  • Thank you for your great article. I posted a write-up of “getting rid of” Nagios previously, and it’s generated a staggering number of responses by those who are attached to Nagios and have used it effectively. This has ignited a similar discussion to what you see in the Mac vs PC or *nix vs Windows discussions pervasive across the internet (complete with personal attacks, I thought we were all adults here…). Those who know me, know I’ve been there and done it in my past, and in speaking with thousands of users of monitoring tools over my time at Gartner I can share some common threads.

  • Thank you for your great article. I posted a write-up of “getting rid of” Nagios previously, and it’s generated a staggering number of responses by those who are attached to Nagios and have used it effectively. This has ignited a similar discussion to what you see in the Mac vs PC or *nix vs Windows discussions pervasive across the internet (complete with personal attacks, I thought we were all adults here…)

  • hank you for your great article. I posted a write-up of “getting rid of” Nagios previously, and it’s generated a staggering number of responses by those who are attached to Nagios and have used it effectively. This has ignited a similar discussion to what you see in thanks bro

  • you for your great article. I posted a write-up of “getting rid of” Nagios previously, and it’s generated a staggering number of responses by those who are attached to Nagios

  • خبردون says:

    Nagios plays a big role in these organizations, often being implemented several different ways in a single enterprise. Trying to standardize the implementation is a challenge especially with most Nagios users selection various components from the open source and Nagios communities to build their personal preferred implementation. By utilizing aspects of open source the vendors who leverage Nagios, but build standardized ways of implementing and managing the footprint create a likely more successful implementation at scale. (EX: Centerity, Centreon, Groundwork, OP5, Opsview).

    Additionally a common issue that is pervasive across monitoring is the over extension of the platform to do more than the core tenants of monitoring. The capture of metrics, notification of issues, and the analysis and correlation of metrics to determine root cause for problem isolation. Monitoring should not run jobs needed to operate and correct infrastructure, yet we see this
    thanks for your great article.

  • Nagios plays a big role in these organizations, often being implemented several different ways in a single enterprise. Trying to standardize the implementation is a challenge especially with most Nagios users selection various components from the open source and Nagios communities to build their personal preferred implementation. By utilizing aspects of open source the vendors who leverage Nagios, but build standardized ways of implementing and managing the footprint create a likely more successful implementation at scale. (EX: Centerity, Centreon, Groundwork, OP5, Opsview).
    Additionally a common issue that is pervasive across monitoring is the over extension of the platform to do more than the core tenants of monitoring. The capture of metrics, notification of issues, and the analysis and correlation correct infrastructure, yet we see this
    thanks for your great article.

  • آگهی says:

    Nagios plays a big role in these organizations, often being implemented several different ways in a single enterprise. Trying to standardize the implementation is a challenge especially with most Nagios users selection various components from the open source and Nagios communities to build their personal preferred implementation. By utilizing aspects of open source the vendors who leverage Nagios, but build standardized ways of implementing and managing the footprint create a likely more successful implementation at scale. (EX: Centerity, r problem isolation. Monitoring should not run jobs needed to operate and correct infrastructure, yet we see this
    thanks for your great article.

  • سرگرمی says:

    Nagios plays a big role in these organizations, often being implemented several different ways in a single enterprise. Trying to standardize the implementation is a challenge especially wrmine root cause for problem isolation. Monitoring should not run jobs needed to operate and correct infrastructure, yet we see this
    thanks for your great article.

  • great article but: those groups). We often speaking with an enterprise or IT architect who is trying to homogenize the management of the IT landscape. This is not just servers, but applications, network devices, storage systems, and other components. If you do not treat your
    thanks for your great article.

  • thanks for your great article..
    The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse, and often managed in isolated groups. In the discussions with these isolated organizations, left to their own devices, have selected a wide array of tools to manage their infrastructure and applications. These tools overlap with other business units within the organization using similar or dissimilar tools. For example a client I spoke with last week had over 65 monitoring tools in place, the size of the environment was 75,000 servers, let alone a vast array of other components not in scope for phase 1

  • مقاله says:

    thanks for your great article..
    The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse, and often managed in isolated groups. In the discussions with these isolated organizations, left to their own devices, have selected a wide array of tools to manage their infrastructure and applications. These tools overlap with other business units within the organization using similar or dissimilar tools.

  • thanks for your great article..
    The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse, and often managed in isolated groups. In the discussions with these isolated organizations, left to their own devices, have selected a wide array of tools to manage their infrastructure and applications.

  • thanks for your great article..
    The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse, and often managed in isolated groups. In the discussions with these isolated organizations,

  • thanks for your great article..
    The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse,

  • اخبار جهانی ، بهترین و جامعترین سیستم جمع آوری
    خبر فارسی و قویترین موتور جستجوی خبر و جستجوگر هوشمند خبر
    اخبار جهان ، با ما از همه چیز باخبر شوید ، اخبار جهانی

  • who know me, know I’ve been there and done it in my past, and in speaking with thousands of

  • who know me, know I’ve been there and done it in my past, and in speaking

  • great article but: those groups). We often speaking with an enterprise or IT architect who is trying to homogenize the management of the IT landscape.

  • Hi hi
    Thank you very much for writing and writing the professional

  • I for one refuse to give the money I earn supporting my clients, to anyone else, just so I can sit on my ass and not have to do any work building my business. The way I provide support is proprietary, so my software solutions should be too. Throwing money at a problem until it goes away, is just lazy and wasteful.

  • go for a simple and inexpensive monitoring tool. I hear from many Gartner clients who decide to implement open source tools based on a talented engineer on the team, but when he leaves the company no one can figure out how to safely upgrade nagios or it’s associated components (This article goes through some of what is needed to manage Nagios

  • فروش رزین شهماری

  • ali says:

    امروزه اینترنت توانسته جایگاه خود را در تجارت پیدا کند. به گونه‌ای که اکثر تجارتها از این بستر برای فروش و معاملات یا معرفی خود استفاده میکنند. این بستر (اینترنت) حتی در اموزش هم موفق عمل کرده . به همین سبب عده زیادی برای تجارت خود از روش اینترنتی استفاده میکنند. بعضی برندها پس از ایجاد یک وب سایت با عنوان تجارت اینترنتی ویا معرفی خود تحت عنوان یک وب سایت نیاز به افزایش سئو دارند. با افزایش سئو گوگل به وب سایت اهمیت بیشتری میدهد و در نتیجه به هنگام جستجوی اینترنتی در سطح بالاتری نمایش داده میشوند.
    راهکارهای زیادی برای افزایش سئو وجود دارد که یکی از آنها ایجاد بک لینک است. بهتر است اینکار به صورت حرفه‌ای و توسط افراد متخصص صورت گیرد. سایتهای زیادی وجود دارند که بک لینک هایی از وبسایتهایی با پیج اتوریتی بالا را برای فروش میگذارند. یک از معتبرترین وب سایتها در این زمینه سون بک لینک است . این وب سایت با فروش بک لینک هایی قوی و دائمی البته با قیمتی ارزان توانسته محبوب شود.
    برای خرید بک لینک ارزان و قوی به سایت سون بک لینک مراجعه کنید

  • nima says:

    hi
    thank you

    this content its great

  • اجاره انواع آپارتمان مبله و لوکس در سعادت آباد تهران

  • اجاره انواع جرثقیل در غرب تهران

  • آموزش حضوری وردپرس در تهران به صورت خصوصی

  • خرید انواع لوازم خانگی از برندهایی همچون ال جی، سامسونگ، بوش و … از فروشگاه از بانه

  • دیجیتال مارکتینگ یلدا

  • ropeeni says:

    hi
    thank you

    this content its great

  • چت says:

    Hi thanks for your very nice and content site

  • کاغذ دیواری قیمت ارزان

  • امنیت کدام نرده حفاظ آهنی برای پنجره و درب آکاردئونی ضد سرقت آپارتمان بیشتر است

    درب آکاردئونی به‌خصوص در آپارتمان‌های مسکونی که امکان باز ماندن در اصلی ساختمان از سوی دیگر همسایه‌ها دور از ذهن نیست؛ و یا به دلیل رفت ‌وآمد زیاد ساکنین و ناآشنا بودن همسایه‌ها با هم، امکان حضور یک غریبه در آپارتمان نیز وجود دارد؛ و در شکل بدتر عدم شناخت و همسایه بودن با آدم‌های غریبه که ممکن است خودشان دردسرزا باشند، یک ضرورت است. مخصوصاً اگر مدتی کسی در خانه شما نباشد، مثلاً به مسافرت چند روزه‌ای بروید .
    طرح حفاظ‌ های آکاردئونی از ساز آکاردئون الهام گرفته شده و نام این درب هم برگرفته از نام همین ساز است. این نوع درها را درب کشوئی (کشویی)، درب کرکره ای، تاشو و … هم می‌نامند .

    • کمترین میزان خطا در ساخت و حرکت بسیار روان درب
    • دارای ضریب امنیتی بسیار
    • کلیه سوراخهای پرچ با دستگاه سمبه ماتریس زده می شود.
    • سایز تسمه ها 5mm × 2Cm
    • تسمه ها دارای 2 سرگرد شده پرس خورده
    • استحکام بی نظیر پرچ ها
    • دارای صدای بسیار کم هنگام بازو بسته کردن به نمونه های دست ساز
    • رنگ کوره ای

    یکی از راه ها برای محافظت از ساختمان ها و ویلا ها استفاده از حفاظ پنجره میباشد،شاید تصور مردم از این نوع حفاظ فقط میله های فلزی ساده باشد اما شرکت آهن سازه با ایده های جدید و جالب توانسته سبک و طراحی قدیمی حفاظ نرده پنجره را کامل تغییر دهد و طراحی ها به سمت لوکس ترو مدرن تر بودن حفاظ پنجره تغییر یافته و در کنار آن امنیت هم بیشتر شده است.در مورد طراحی و رنگبندی و ابعاد حفاظ هیچ گونه محدودیتی وجود ندارد بلکه تمامی طرح ها بر اساس دیزاین ساختمان و رنگبندی نمای آن دیزاین میشود .

    حفاظ شاخ گوزنی
    نوعی حفاظ از جنس فلز مقاوم است که بر روی دیوار ساختمان نصب می شود. با نصب حفاظ روی دیوار (نرده دیوار) با هزینه بسیار کم امنیت ساختمان را تضمین کنید. معمولا حفاظ شاخ گوزنی را با نام های دیگری مثل نرده شاخ گوزنی، حفاظ بوته ای، حفاظ دیوار،حفاظ ساختمان، حفاظ آبشاری، حفاظ آهنی، حفاظ نیزار، حفاظ دیواری، حفاظ سرنیزه ای، حفاظ لیلیوم ، حفاظ بوته خاری و محافظ شاخ گوزنی نیز می شناسند .

    تماس با بزرگترین تولید کننده نرده حفاظ
    09127800603
    09128047694
    02122503846

  • ahanhefaz says:

    the best post great nice

  • shadabad says:

    best site best post good nice

  • صائلا بزرگترین تولید کننده گیت های کنترل تردد

  • ناز چت says:

    Thank you.very nice’

  • ILI Service says:

    دانلود جواب ورک بوک کانون زبان ایران و دانلود سوال و سامری همه ترم ها به صورت کاملا رایگان. iliservice.ir کانال تلگرام و صفحه اینستاگرام: ili_service جواب ورک بوک pre1 کانون زبان رایگان | ورک بوک high 1 | ورک بوک advanced 1 | حل ورک بوک advanced 1 | جواب تمرین های کتاب high 1 | حل تمرین کتاب های کانون زبان ایران | جواب ورک بوک | جواب ورک بوک inter1 رایگان | جواب ورک بوک pre1 رایگان

  • دانلود جواب ورک بوک کانون زبان ایران و دانلود سوال و سامری همه ترم ها به صورت کاملا رایگان. iliservice.ir کانال تلگرام و صفحه اینستاگرام: ili_service جواب ورک بوک pre1 کانون زبان رایگان | ورک بوک high 1 | ورک بوک advanced 1 | حل ورک بوک advanced 1 | جواب تمرین های کتاب high 1 | حل تمرین کتاب های کانون زبان ایران | جواب ورک بوک | جواب ورک بوک inter1 رایگان | جواب ورک بوک pre1 رایگان

  • majlesiran says:

    Thank you very much for writing and writing the professional

  • Thank you very much for writing and writing the professional

  • fence guard says:

    best site very good news

  • best site good news very nice

  • ahansazan says:

    حفاظ آکاردئونی
    09128700940
    صنایع فلزی آهنسازان

  • lianmovie says:

    I quite agree
    Thank you

  • iromovie says:

    The best site.!

    thanks

  • wptarahcomx says:

    The best site.!!!!

    thanks

  • great article. thanks .The problem is not that you have an opinion on the state of Nagios vs other options, it’s that you’re basing your opinions as facts.
    1.) Nothing works in a vacuum. Most entities running nagios are running it with other software to accomplish various things that nagios wasn’t designed to do. ( Puppet/chef for automation, Munin for a front end, etc.)
    2.) The “your way sucks” mentality is very easy to have, and really not a good fit for the open source community. There are thousands of ways to do everything, and OFTEN things are done in a way to maximize the current environment. People that shout “this is always the way it’s been done” are in my top 5 classes of annoyances, but slightly behind the camp that says “this way is new, so we should do that simply because newer is better,” and way behind the people that boast.

  • یمت حفاظ شاخ شاخ گوزنی از مهمترین دلایل انتخاب و خرید یک نرده حفاظ شاخ گوزنی از سوی مصرف کننده بشمار می رود .

    مشتریان نرده های حفاظ با گردش در بازار با نرده هایی حفاظی مواجه می شوند که تفاوت زیادی از لحاظ قیمت با یکدیگر دارند ،از قیمت های بسیار پایین تا گران !
    عوامل اصلی موثر در قیمت تمام شده نرده حفاظ شاخ گوزنی را میتوانید در این مقاله بخوانید
    بهترین نمونه کارهای حفاظ شاخ گوزنی ارائه شده سال1398 را نیز حتما مشاهده بفرمایید

  • برترین تولید کننده حفاظ شاخ گوزنی

  • هوکا فروتز says:

    بهترین سابت برای خرید تنباکو

  • حفاظ شاخ گوزنی آبشاری

  • Thanks very nice.
    Best site.

  • برترین حفاظ شاخ گوزنی بوته ای

  • this is cool and nice
    شهروندی ترکیه

  • شرکت بین المللی ترکیش لایف ارائه دهنده خدمات مهاجرت به ترکیه

  • هزینه ثبت شرکت چقدر است ؟
    همیشه هزینه مهمترین مساله است . برای ثبت شرکت باید بدانید که در چه مواردی باید به طور قانونی هزینه پرداخت کنید. این هزینه ها ثابت نیستند و به موارد مختلفی بستگی دارند.

    مواردی که لازم است برای آن هزینه پرداخت کنید شامل موارد زیر است :

    تعیین نوع شرکت ( شرکتها در انواع مختلفی از قبیل : شرکت سهامی خاص ، مسئولیت محدود و غیره ثبت می شوند)
    میزان سرمایه اولیه ثبت شرکت
    هزینه تعیین نام برای شرکت
    میزان حجم موضوع درج شده در اساس نامه
    هزینه حق الثبت در اداره ثبت شرکت ها
    هزینه ابطال تمبر سرمایه شرکت
    کوتاه و یا طولانی بون موضوع فعالیت شرکت
    مجوزی بودن یا نبودن موضوع فعالیت شرکت
    هزینه پلمپ دفاتر
    حق الوکاله وکیل موسسه
    اینها تنها موارد عمومی هستند که باید مرحله به مرحله پیش بروید و هزینه آنرا پرداخت کنید. بعد از ثبت شرکت باید اقدام به پرداخت هزینه و دریافت روزنامه رسمی و روزنامه کثیرالانتشار کنید فیش واریزی در هر مرحله از ثبت شرکت را باید به اداره ثبت شرکتها تحویل دهید.

    ضمن اینکه اگر کار ثبتی خود را به موسسات ثبت شرکت بسپارید ، کارمزد شرکت ثبت موسسه نیز به موارد فوق اضافه می گردد.

  • amir ali says:

    مطلب بی نهایت زیبایی است و آروزی موفقیت

  • متن خیلی جالبی می باشد و آرزو ی یه حال خوب

  • These attacks are bothering my computer a lot

  • Thank you very much for writing and writing the professional

  • Thank you very much for writing and writing the professional

  • While we generally speak of fads in terms of clothing and toys, there is also something called an institutional fad, fads that occur within serious institutions such as education

  • آهنگ says:

    I think about it is most required for making more on this get engaged

  • خریدار انواع لپتاپ و پرینتر دست دوم و نو در منزل و محل کار شما حضور سریع و پرداخت نقد و کلرت به کارت در محل
    خریدار پرینتر, خریدار چاپگر, خریدار لب تاب , خریدار لپتاپ

  • با انجام ابدومینوپلاستی دیگر نیازی نخواهد بود نگران چربی های موضعی شکم باشید. چرا که به راحتی با کمک این روش چربی ها اضافه تخلیه و ظاهر شکم به شکمی صاف و بدون چربی تبدیل می شود. معمولاً ناحیه شکم برای داشتن تناسب اندام بسیار مهم است

  • تیر اهن یکی از مهم ترین و اساسی ترین پروفیل‌های ساختمانی است که اکثر کارخانه‌ها و پروژه‌های صنعتی از تیر آهن استفاده می‌کنند. استاندارد‌هایی که کارخانه‌ها بر روال آن کار می‌کنند استاندارد (IPE) است.

  • این روزها پروتز باسن طرفداران زیادی پیدا کرده است که به بسیاری از خانم‌ها کمک می کند تا اندامی زیبا و خوش فرم داشته باشند. امروزه از روش های مختلفی برای انجام فرم دهی باسن استفاده می‌شود که در کمترین زمان ممکن اندام ایده آل به دست می آید.

  • بیشتر اوقات زمانی که به یک آرایشگاه مراجعه می کنیم بعد از اتمام کار از نتیجه آن رضایت کامل را به دست نمی آوریم. این مشکل به خاطر خودمان است.

  • کاشت مو روش بسیار مناسب و مفید و البته دائمی برای رفع مشکل طاسی است . افراد بسیاری را می بینیم که به دلایل مختلف دچار ریزش مو هستند و بعد از مدتی قسمتی از سر و یا کل سر با طاسی مواجه می شود.در ابتدا برای اینکه بتوان از ریزش موها جلوگیری کرد بهتر است

  • کاشت ریش در جوامع امروزی همه روزه مدها و لباسهای گوناگونی را در میان مردم شاهدیم که همه روزه دست خوش تغییرات می باشد.این تغییر و تحول مدها و لباسها نیز در میان آقایان نیز به صورت وافری همه روزه مشاهده میشود و افراد با تیپ ها و لباسهای مختلف سعی بر ابراز اندام و هرچه بهتر جلوه دادن خود نیز می باشند.

  • آمار اعتیاد بالاست. همین باعث شده تا شاهد تاسیس تعداد بالایی کمپ ترک اعتیاد در ایران باشیم. کسرت تاسیس این مراکز، به نوبه‌ی خود هم باعث خوشحالی است، و هم جای نگرانی دارد.

  • Many thanks for your assistance in our project.

  • hamcart says:

    کارت تخفیف چیست؟

    کارت تخفیف در واقع کارتی هوشمند است که مشتریان حین خرید با ارائه ی آن می توانند تا حدی از تخفیف بهره مند شوند و در واقع هزینه ی خرید خود را کاهش دهند.

    ویژگی های یک کارت تخفیف خوب:

    یک کارت تخفیف خوب، تخفیفات خیلی خوبی دارد.

     ۱) امکان استفاده ی آسان:

    بیشتر کارت­ تخفیف هایی که از سوی فروشگاه­‌ها، صاحبان مشاغل مختلف و شرکت­ها به کاربران هدیه داده می­شود، به راحتی قابل استفاده هستند و خریداران در خرید بعدی بدون هیچ دردسری می توانند از آن استفاده کنند.

     ۲) تخفیفات بهتر:

    مشتریان بسیاری تمایل دارند هزینه­های ناشی از خرید خود را کاهش دهند. به همین دلیل به دنبال کارت­های تخفیفی هستند که بیشترین میزان تخفیف را داشته باشد.

    البته در مورد فروشگاه­هایی که چند شعبه دارد باید این نکته را نیز باید یادآوری کنیم که کارت­های تخفیفی طرفداران بیشتری دارند که در سایر شعب یک فروشگاه نیز قابل استفاده باشند.

    از این رو کارت های تخفیفی که مربوط به یک فروشگاه خاصی هستند و در سایر شعب کارایی ندارند طرفدار چندان زیادی ندارند.

    انواع کارت تخفیف:

    کارت های تخفیف انواع گوناگونی دارند. کارت‌­های تخفیف معمولی، کارت­‌های تخفیف هوشمند، کارت­‌های ­ تخفیف خدماتی و کارت­های تخفیف مالی رایج ترین انواع کارت‌های تخفیف هستند.

    ۱) کارت تخفیف معمولی:

    این کارت ها مثل کارت معمولی هستند که روی آنها مبلغ مشخصی نوشته شده و مشتریان با ارائه­ی آن، می­توانند از همان میزان تخفیف بهره مند شوند.

    ۲) کارت تخفیف هوشمند:

    این نوع کارت‌­های تخفیف غالبا برای کاربران دائم و مشتریان باشگاه صادر می­شود که دارای اطلاعاتی مثل مشخصات کاربر و میزان خرید اوست.

    با توجه به میزان خرید کاربر، درصد تخفیف نیز تغییر می­یابد.

    ۳) کارت تخفیف خدماتی:

    این نوع کارت تخفیف شامل کارت‌های تخفیف متنوعی است که شما در ازای عرضه ی آنها قادر خواهید بود از یک سری خدمات با قیمت مناسب تری استفاده کنید.

    کارت تخفیف دندانپزشکی، کارت‌های تخفیف استخر و … انواع رایج کارت های تخفیف می­باشند.

    ۴) کارت تخفیف مالی:

    این نوع کارت­‌های تخفیف غالبا مربوط به موسسات مالی است که با ارائه­ی آن ممکن است سود وام و یا سایر تسهیلات به نفع مشتری کم شود.

    یکی از رایج ترین انواع کارت­‌های تخفیف مالی، کارت تخفیف ایرانیان است.

  • thanks for your great article..
    The typical Gartner client is medium to large companies, they typically have grown through the years by organic and acquisition of other businesses. This makes their IT landscape quite diverse,

  • boss matka says:

    The intended recipient you have any questions about the perfeto 7 and smart wayslearning.

  • thanks
    I agree with you. But is there any better tool than Nagios XI at this price range???

  • Thanks, this is rather great news!

  • اگر شما هم از آن دسته از افرادی هستید که به فکر پروتز فک هستید،

  • شاید اسم هایفوتراپی امروزه زیاد به گوشتان خورده باشد در واقع هایفوتراپی جدیدترین تکنولوژی جوانسازی صورت و گردن است

  • معرفی بهترین دکتر اورولوژی در تهران +لیست ده تایی_ دکتر اورولوژی کیست ؟ و در چه زمینه ای فعالیت انجام میدهد؟ دکتر ارولوژی فردی است

  • ساکنین آپارتمان‌های منطقه شرق شهر تهران، معمولا به دنبال شرکت معتبری در زمینه تعمیر آسانسور در شرق تهران هستند.

  • شیراز به عنوان یکی از شهرهای بسیار بزرگ و پیشرفته در زمینه انواع جراحی های زیبایی پیشگام است.

  • امروزه تقاضا برای عمل جراحی بینی بیشتر شده است و خوشبختانه افزایش تبحر و مهارت جراحان باعث این امر شده است.

  • اعمال جراحی پلاستیک شامل اعمالی می شودکه به منظور تغییر شکل و ترمیم هریک از اعضای بدن، بدون صدمه دیدن عملکرد طبیعی عضو انجام می گیرد

  • ما در سئو کوک در حال آموزش سئو سایت و آموزش محتوا نویسی سایت و طراحی سایت در کرج و تهران هستیم . در سئوکوک تمامی خدمات طراحی سایت از جمله :طراحی سایت خبری،املاک،مدارس،پزشکی و نوبت دهی ،شرکتی،چندزبانه،فروشگاهی .. با بهترین و مناسب ترین قیمت در تهران و کرج ارائه می دهیم .

  • بازی ها و نرم افزار های هک شده بازی مود شده ساکر استار و فوتبال استریک هک شده بستگی به بروزرسانی نرم افزار ها و انتشار نرم افزارهای جدید دارد اما این آمار میتواند به روزانه بالای 30 مطلب بروزرسانی و انتشار نرم افزار جدید منجر شود که ما به همراه تیم قوی خودمون این میزان رو پوشش میدیم تا همیشه به روز باشیم.

  • خرید نهال از رویال نهال

  • خرید نهال از نهالستان طبیعت سبز

  • نهالستان میاندواب بهترین نهالستان ایران

  • نهال گردو و خرید نهال گردو در نهالستان گردو

  • نهال یادام و خرید نهال بادام در نهالستان بادام

  • نهال انگور و خرید نهال انگور در نهالستان انگور

  • خرید نهال از نهالستان میاندواب

  • بهترین نهالستان کشور بدون واسطه

  • خرید نهال گردو و نهال گردو

  • خرید نهال بادام و نهال بادام

  • نهالستان انگور و خرید نهال انگور

  • hamcart says:

    The dental discount card hamcart is excellent

  • almaskart says:

    Buying a customer club should be tailored to the needs of the business or organization. Note that the main purpose of the branding customer club is to bring back previous customers and expand the market