MRTG-like tool for WHS RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm very glad to have recieved my WHS invite and I have some suggestions that I will split in 2 separate threads.

    Just like I have seen with Linux Servers, I would love to have a "MRTG-like" tool included in WHS.


    It could enable us to have info about CPU, BW, HDD usage over time, and much more (connections per user ...). This is the kind of info i would love to have and if we could fetch these data, and process them on a gadget for Vista (or Sideshow -see suggestions N° 2 ;) ) it could be very useful.



    Sunday, February 18, 2007 12:26 AM

All replies

  • A one-stop diagnostic data display would be highly desirable to anyone with a gear in their head, from fathers in their 60s all the way down. 

    Unfortunately for us, such a low priority feature is probably relegated to being but a cherry on top of WHS :)
    Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:10 AM
  • Just finished configuring three personalized Systats docklets after installing Objectdock. Gives me :
    - network upload/download in kbytes/s along with a couple of animated histograms showing the last 30 seconds activity. (Why isn't this standard on a Windows desktop ?)
    - cpu stats
    - memory stats
    - a prettier remote desktop.
    Seems to work ok so far, but I think OD is supposed to work with 2003.
    Tuesday, February 20, 2007 4:07 PM
  • Why not enable SNMP agent monitoring on WHS?  If it's based on W2K3 Server, there should be a component available to install to enable SNMP monitoring.  I do it with XP Pro and mrtg works just fine.  I'm still having problems getting my invite processing all worked out, but as soon as I get it in and running I'll see if it's available.  Or are you talking about a pretty dashboard that you see when you remote in to the server?  That would be cool ...

    - Jim
    Tuesday, February 20, 2007 4:13 PM
  • Very pretty.

    The remote desktop was very ugly. It was giving me Windows Classic.
    Slipped into services (in Admin Tools - woops, is that a bug report) and turned Themes on then whipped on Royale Noir. I'm pretty new to this but about the only way I could get a wallpaper was to use a group policy to enable active desktop then used another to set the wall. Sometime later when it hadn't refreshed I moved the taskbar and it changed. Maybe I just should have right clicked on the desktop and clicked refresh or even rebooted but you can probably see I like doing things the hard (dumb) way.

    Will WHS still work in the morning?
    Tuesday, February 20, 2007 5:01 PM
  • From reading the details on WHS, it seems like the intended access to the server is through the WHS console from a client machine.  The need for an RDP session (excuse the pun) should be remote.  It would seem that adding an active desktop and theming of the UI, etc. would be taking away from the server duties.  I tend to agree with the spartan look that he server has since Joe Consumer will be doing all his work in the WHS Console from the client.
    Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:01 PM
  • This can be as true as you want it to be but I still don't like ugly. Sorry, Spartan.

    And I'm glad you brought Joe up. I resolved to read none of the documentation until after WHS was up and running. Just to be like Joe. It was an experience. Still, by the time I did read the documentation it meant a lot more to me. However along the way I was doing things like using RDP sessions to add user accounts. (Nope, no good)

    Anyway, the release documentation says something like :

    "One of the most powerful things about Windows Home Server is that it is built using the same technology that powers the Windows Server® 2003 operating system. Advanced users can and will make use of functionality that is present in Windows Home Server but not presented through the Windows Home Server Console. To access the underlying technology, you can log in to the Administrator's Desktop (typically by using Remote Desktop) and can access many of the standard administrative tools that are available in Windows Server 2003."

    It seems to me that if I want to do something boring like turn the WHS off for example, it is slightly faster and more convenient to use remote desktop with the appropriate shortcut somewhere on the desktop to give me a one click shutdown rather than open the settings in the console, change to the general tab, punch shutdown and then confirm shutdown.
    Wednesday, February 21, 2007 12:15 AM
  • Also, when I open the console it opens in a window that cannot be maximized and which opens, as far as I am concerned, in the wrong place. So I drag it away. Next time I open it, it's back in the wrong place. So I drag it away. Next time...

    When I use Remote Desktop and restore down from full screen to window, move the window, close the session, reopen the session - voila, it remembers.
    Wednesday, February 21, 2007 12:34 AM
  • Okay, I concede.  I too like things to look nice, so I would probably opt for switching from the Classic look on the server though I can understand why they defaulted it the way they did.  And I definitely don't like that the WHS Console is a fixed size (non-resizable) and always assumes its default position.
    Wednesday, February 21, 2007 1:03 AM
  • Ok Blaine ! I like it a lot more when you say you don't like bland. In a way, it's a shame because for a moment there I thought I might not actually be living in a world where Appearance Is Everything.

    I remember using a bland and white screen then seeing a colour monitor for the first time.

    I wanted it, Blaine.

    No matter how much in love I might be with (the idea of) the automated backup, after I install WHS and open either the Console or Remote Desktop the blankness sort of takes your breath away. I can do something with the Remote Desktop. What you need to do, Blaine, is to make the Console at least appear to do more. It is too empty, too quickly explored and then relegated to the recycle bin of uninteresting objects. Fill it up !

    By offering the choice of the two interfaces I am afraid that the Console may end up fighting a losing battle. Not surprising really. The tendency for me is to try to find out how to do Console only tasks on Remote Desktop then just use Remote Desktop. If it was possible to do the reverse, I would. Frankly it seems a little perverse that I need one interface for some tasks and another for others. Personally I would have been happier if rather than the Console you had just developed a good custom desktop for the server.

    Thursday, February 22, 2007 4:40 PM