librenms

Pros of Zabbix

• More comprehensive and feature-rich, offering advanced monitoring capabilities
• Highly scalable, suitable for large enterprise environments
• Extensive customization options and flexibility in configuration

Cons of Zabbix

• Steeper learning curve and more complex setup process
• Requires more system resources and can be resource-intensive
• User interface can be less intuitive and dated compared to LibreNMS

Code Comparison

Zabbix (PHP):

<?php
require_once dirname(__FILE__).'/include/config.inc.php';
$page['title'] = _('Configuration of discovery rules');
$page['file'] = 'discoveryconf.php';
require_once dirname(__FILE__).'/include/page_header.php';

LibreNMS (PHP):

<?php
$no_refresh = true;
$config['memcached']['enable'] = false;
require 'includes/init.php';
$pagetitle[] = 'Devices';
require 'includes/html/page-header.php';

Both projects use PHP for their core functionality, but Zabbix tends to have more complex code structures due to its broader feature set. LibreNMS generally has a more streamlined and modern codebase, focusing on simplicity and ease of use.

Pros of Prometheus

• Highly scalable and designed for cloud-native environments
• Powerful query language (PromQL) for complex data analysis
• Extensive ecosystem with many exporters and integrations

Cons of Prometheus

• Steeper learning curve, especially for PromQL
• Less out-of-the-box support for network devices compared to LibreNMS
• Requires more manual configuration for comprehensive monitoring

Code Comparison

Prometheus configuration (prometheus.yml):

global:
  scrape_interval: 15s

scrape_configs:
  - job_name: 'node'
    static_configs:
      - targets: ['localhost:9100']

LibreNMS configuration (config.php):

$config['snmp']['community'] = array('public');
$config['autodiscovery']['xdp'] = true;
$config['autodiscovery']['ospf'] = true;
$config['autodiscovery']['bgp'] = true;
$config['autodiscovery']['snmpscan'] = true;

Both Prometheus and LibreNMS are powerful open-source monitoring solutions, but they cater to different use cases. Prometheus excels in cloud-native environments and offers more flexibility for custom metrics, while LibreNMS provides better out-of-the-box support for network devices and easier setup for traditional infrastructure monitoring.

Pros of Netdata

• Real-time, high-resolution monitoring with per-second granularity
• Lightweight and efficient, with minimal system resource usage
• Easy to install and configure, with automatic detection of many services

Cons of Netdata

• Primarily focused on real-time monitoring, with limited long-term data storage
• Less extensive device support compared to LibreNMS, especially for network hardware

Code Comparison

Netdata configuration (netdata.conf):

[global]
    update every = 1
    memory mode = ram
    history = 3600

LibreNMS configuration (config.php):

$config['snmp']['timeout'] = 1;
$config['snmp']['retries'] = 5;
$config['rrd_purge'] = 365;

Netdata emphasizes real-time updates and in-memory storage, while LibreNMS focuses on SNMP-based monitoring and long-term data retention.

Key Differences

• Netdata excels in real-time monitoring and visualization, while LibreNMS is more suited for traditional network monitoring and management.
• LibreNMS offers broader device support and network-specific features, whereas Netdata provides a more general-purpose monitoring solution.
• Netdata is typically easier to set up and use out of the box, while LibreNMS may require more configuration for optimal performance.

Both tools have their strengths, and the choice between them depends on specific monitoring requirements and infrastructure needs.

Pros of Grafana

• More versatile and flexible, supporting a wide range of data sources
• Advanced visualization capabilities with a rich set of customizable panels
• Strong community support and extensive plugin ecosystem

Cons of Grafana

• Steeper learning curve, especially for complex dashboards
• Requires additional setup for network monitoring compared to LibreNMS

Code Comparison

LibreNMS (PHP):

$device = device_by_id_cache($device_id);
$graphs = get_graphs_by_device($device);
$ports = get_ports_by_device($device_id);

Grafana (TypeScript):

const dashboard = new DashboardModel(dashboardJson);
const panel = new PanelModel(panelJson);
dashboard.addPanel(panel);

LibreNMS is primarily focused on network monitoring and management, while Grafana is a more general-purpose data visualization and analytics platform. LibreNMS provides out-of-the-box network monitoring capabilities, whereas Grafana requires additional configuration for similar functionality but offers greater flexibility in data sources and visualization options.

LibreNMS is written in PHP and designed specifically for network monitoring, while Grafana is built with TypeScript and focuses on creating customizable dashboards for various data types. The code snippets illustrate the different approaches: LibreNMS deals directly with devices and graphs, while Grafana works with abstract dashboard and panel models.

Pros of Telegraf

• More flexible and extensible plugin system for collecting metrics from various sources
• Lightweight and efficient, with lower resource usage
• Supports a wide range of output formats and destinations

Cons of Telegraf

• Steeper learning curve for configuration and setup
• Less out-of-the-box functionality for network monitoring specifically
• Requires additional components (like InfluxDB) for full monitoring solution

Code Comparison

Telegraf (Go)

func (a *Accumulator) AddFields(
    measurement string,
    fields map[string]interface{},
    tags map[string]string,
    t ...time.Time,
) {
    a.Add(measurement, fields, tags, t...)
}

LibreNMS (PHP)

function addHost($hostname, $community, $snmpver, $port = 161)
{
    $device = Device::firstOrCreate(['hostname' => $hostname]);
    $device->community = $community;
    $device->snmpver = $snmpver;
    $device->port = $port;
    $device->save();
}

The code snippets demonstrate the different approaches: Telegraf focuses on generic metric collection, while LibreNMS is tailored for network device monitoring. Telegraf uses Go for performance, while LibreNMS uses PHP for web integration.