NetXMS Support Forum

English Support => General Support => Topic started by: fabrizio.alba on March 11, 2024, 01:12:08 PM

Title: Range of required resources
Post by: fabrizio.alba on March 11, 2024, 01:12:08 PM
Good morning everyone!
As final work for my degree thesis, I am bringing the report on the implementation and configuration of netXMS in my Company network.

Dear Admins, based on your experience would you be able to evaluate the necessary resources (CPU, RAM, DB disk space) depending on the number of clients to monitor, excluding the space required by Windows logs?
Something like:
from 1 to 100 clients: x CPU, yGB RAM, z GB DB space
from 101 to 500 clients: ...

Thank you so much for your support and the wonderful product you have developed and supported.

Fabrizio
Title: Re: Range of required resources
Post by: Filipp Sudanov on March 13, 2024, 12:00:28 PM
It's quite hard to estimate required resources, as they depend not only on the number of nodes, but also on number of interfaces, number of DCIs per node, data collection interval and storage time, number of scripts, number of various events happening and so on. Also, on big systems use of Timescale DB helps, as it minimizes housekeeper resource usage.

Here are some real-life data about tree installations - X, Y and Z. All are using SSD or NVMe storage. On these systems Postgres (non-timescale) was used, running on the same server, so RAM and core numbers cover both NetXMS and DB engine.

Number of datapoints per second was obtained from the DB by this query: SELECT polling_interval, retention_time, count(polling_interval) FROM items GROUP BY polling_interval, retention_time ORDER BY retention_time, polling_interval;
 
XYZ
Objects205545604041542
Monitored nodes217526565376
Collectible DCIs34260185742372240
Collected datapoints per second3729792290
Stored datapoints, millions89951497844195
RAM, GB2474160
CPU cores81020
DB size, GB23715001500
Bytes per datapoint5310861
Title: Re: Range of required resources
Post by: fabrizio.alba on March 13, 2024, 12:16:11 PM
Thanks Filipp!
Very helpful as usual...  :)
 
Fabrizio