> Maybe rephrased some people have to ping 10K boxes per minute and other people have to check 1000 services or files or aspects on 10 boxes and its not REALLY

> Maybe rephrased some people have to ping 10K boxes per minute and other people have to check 1000 services or files or aspects on 10 boxes and its not REALLY possible for the same codebase to serve both groups equally well in actual real world practice. Really? Why? The first thing seems quite easy all around. Configuration-wise one would expect it to be simple. Computation-wise, pinging 10K boxes per minute means sending <200 packets per second (and receiving at most the same number). Maybe 3X that or so to get multiple samples. That's nothing for a modern machine. The second one obviously requires some more complexity but I don't know why the extensible configuration and plugin system it'd require would have to interfere with simply pinging a bunch of machines. Computation-wise, again sending <200 requests per second should be trivial unless they're spectacularly heavy-weight. The Nagios plugin protocol does seem to be somewhat heavy-weight, though. Looks like it still fork()+exec()s on every probe? https://nagios-plugins.org/doc/guidelines.html https://nagios-plugins.org/doc/guidelines.html That seems like a much greater problem in terms of computation than the actual probes themselves, particularly if probes are written in a scripting language with non-trivial startup overhead. Doesn't look like Icinga is any different? What significant architectural differences exist between the two?