Topic
  • 2 replies
  • Latest Post - ‏2013-03-19T12:23:28Z by SystemAdmin
SystemAdmin
SystemAdmin
847 Posts

Pinned topic HTTP Server Transactions Tracking - Best approach ?

‏2013-03-18T20:54:02Z |
Hi,

I can see three ways of monitoring Transactions Tracking in HTTP Servers:

1. Global Web Response Time: WRT installed with two NICs, one connected to the main switch and another to general use; I can monitor the transactions tracking in all HTTP Servers;

2. Local Web Response Time: WRT installed and using only one NIC. With this, I can monitor the transactions tracking in the HTTP Server installed in the machine;

3. ARM approach to monitor the IBM HTTP Servers. I can monitor the transactions tracking in the associated HTTP Server only. In this approach, I must to reconfigure the WebSphere plugin.

Which is the best approach ?
Updated on 2013-03-19T12:23:28Z at 2013-03-19T12:23:28Z by SystemAdmin
  • LukeMcKenna
    LukeMcKenna
    16 Posts

    Re: HTTP Server Transactions Tracking - Best approach ?

    ‏2013-03-19T02:19:19Z  
    Antonio,

    You have correctly identified the three different approaches. I'll try to explain when each could/should be used.

    If you have the ability configure a SPAN (or equivalent) port on your network, then we usually recommend option 1. The benefits of this option (which we refer to as "Appliance mode") are that any overhead incurred by the Web Response Time agent is on a separate box, and there is no impact on the machine running your production application. You can also monitor multiple HTTP servers using this approach, being mindful of not overloading a single WRT agent with too much data.

    Option 2 is often used when access to the network configuration is difficult or not possible.

    Option 3 can be used if you are only interested in Transaction Tracking information and do not need the different information WRT provides (Client Time, Network Time, etc), but Option 1 or 2 is preferred in most environments.

    Hope that helps.

    Regards,
    Luke McKenna
    --
    Development Manager - IBM Application Performance Management
    Australia Development Lab
  • SystemAdmin
    SystemAdmin
    847 Posts

    Re: HTTP Server Transactions Tracking - Best approach ?

    ‏2013-03-19T12:23:28Z  
    Antonio,

    You have correctly identified the three different approaches. I'll try to explain when each could/should be used.

    If you have the ability configure a SPAN (or equivalent) port on your network, then we usually recommend option 1. The benefits of this option (which we refer to as "Appliance mode") are that any overhead incurred by the Web Response Time agent is on a separate box, and there is no impact on the machine running your production application. You can also monitor multiple HTTP servers using this approach, being mindful of not overloading a single WRT agent with too much data.

    Option 2 is often used when access to the network configuration is difficult or not possible.

    Option 3 can be used if you are only interested in Transaction Tracking information and do not need the different information WRT provides (Client Time, Network Time, etc), but Option 1 or 2 is preferred in most environments.

    Hope that helps.

    Regards,
    Luke McKenna
    --
    Development Manager - IBM Application Performance Management
    Australia Development Lab
    Thanks for your attention.

    You make clear my mind. Now, I have arguments to talk with the client.