Usability feature request

[Adelie]

If some of these have been mentioned before I apologize, But here goes:

1. The ability to apply a template change to hosts. Lets say I have about 100 identical hosts and I want to add 1 new graph to each one. Currently I would have to click through manually for each one, first adding the Graph and Data Templates to each device, and then manually create graphs for each one.

2. Add a duplicate "Cancel /Save" buttons at the top of the page so that for each page refresh the user does not have to scroll all the way to the bottom every time. Even on a 20" LCD you have to scroll often to hit the buttons.

[gandalf]

If some of these have been mentioned before I apologize, But here goes:

1. The ability to apply a template change to hosts. Lets say I have about 100 identical hosts and I want to add 1 new graph to each one. Currently I would have to click through manually for each one, first adding the Graph and Data Templates to each device, and then manually create graphs for each one.

Please use a host template for similar hosts. With upcoming cacti 087c, changes to a host template will be propagated to all attached devices

Reinhard

[Adelie]

I do use templates. The problem, is that I can not make a change to a template and apply it to all of the attached devices.

I will eagerly await 087c for this feature.

[Adelie]

Is there a rough date estimate as to when 087c will be out?

[gandalf]

We are planning for a public beta in the next few days; other option is to release it immediately
Reinhard

[Howie]

With upcoming cacti 087c, changes to a host template will be propagated to all attached devices

I hope it has some kind of warning, that's a nasty surprise if you are used to the "old way".

[gandalf]

No, it doesn't. And there is no "do you really want to proceed" popup.
Reinhard

[gandalf]

Oh, I'm very sorry. This feature is implemented in 088, NOT in 087c. Sometimes I loose track of all those changes.
Expect 088 public beta by the end of this year.
And, Howie, I will re-think about a prompt asking the user to confirm the change of the list of hosts associated with that very host template. I was already thinking about this but was too lazy to implement it
Reinhard

[lints]

I would recommend that instead of "host" templates we have "groups" or "roles".

Currently if I have a number of Windows 2003 Exchange servers running on HP hardware, I would have to create a host template that matched that. However, if we bought a new Dell server and installed Windows 2003 and exchange, it would require a new host template or modifications of the existing ones.

Instead I think it would be more efficient to have a "group" or "role" for Exchange, another for Windows 2003 and yet another for HP Proliant hardware.

If I then had a Windows 2003 server running SQL Server 2005 on HP Proliant hardware, I would assign it the 'SQL Server 2005' pack, the 'HP Proliant' pack and the 'Windows 2003' pack, thereby giving it all the graphs it needs.

[gandalf]

That matches some of my thoughts as well. I was thinking of a "host template" (in your wording a "role") that holds host templates itself.
We are already discussing a new layer of abstract "grouping" like a site, a role or stuff. But no code for this yet
Reinhard

[TheWitness]

I would believe the "best" way to validate what a host would do is by writing a rule based detection engine.

For example, you may have the following types of hosts:

DNS Server
MySQL Database Server
Oracle Server
Postfix Server
HP Windows Server with Insight MIBS
Dell Windows Server with Dell MIBS
AD Server with MS MIBS
...

If we provided a way for users to "Template" detection logic, or have a host be member of multiple Templates based upon the rule, that might make Cacti more versatile.

A rule for a Dell Windows box, could be a combination of a sysDescr match like I already have in MacTrack combined with say, the existence of some key vendor OID's.

Then on top of that, if it's an AD box, we may attempt to SYN an LDAP port like 389 for example. If that test passes, add the AD Template.

You get the Idea?

TheWitness

[TheWitness]

Hmm, I just repeated the post from three posts ago

TheWitness

[Howie]

I would believe the "best" way to validate what a host would do is by writing a rule based detection engine.

As long as you could override it. For routers it would be mostly OK (although some of my routers run as LNS/VPN boxes and others don't for example, and it's not decided by the product id either), but a picklist of manual "roles" with some kind of suggestion based on sysDescr might be OK