Stories with Tag performance monitoring

• Show HN: Appstat – Process Monitor for Windows

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-04 15:24:32

  Verbose tl;dr

  Appstat is a free, open-source process monitor for Windows presented as a modern alternative to existing tools. It offers a clean and responsive UI, focusing on real-time performance monitoring with detailed metrics like CPU usage, memory consumption, I/O operations, and network activity. Appstat aims to provide a comprehensive view of system resource utilization by individual processes, enabling users to quickly identify performance bottlenecks and troubleshoot issues. It boasts features like customizable columns, sorting, filtering, process tree views, and historical data charting for deeper analysis.

  Pragmar has introduced Appstat, a new process monitoring tool specifically designed for Windows. Appstat aims to provide a comprehensive and detailed view of all running processes, offering more information and a more user-friendly experience than the built-in Windows Task Manager. It presents this information in a clean, modern interface that focuses on clarity and ease of navigation.

  The tool goes beyond simply listing processes, providing in-depth metrics such as CPU usage, memory consumption, disk I/O operations (both read and write), and network activity. Users can see not only the overall resource usage of each process but also historical data, allowing them to track trends and identify potential performance bottlenecks or unusual activity over time. This historical tracking feature facilitates diagnosing intermittent issues or understanding resource usage patterns.

  Appstat offers several features designed to enhance user workflow. A powerful search function allows users to quickly locate specific processes by name or PID. Users can also group processes, simplifying the analysis of related applications or services. Furthermore, the tool allows users to easily terminate processes directly from the interface, providing a convenient way to manage running applications.

  Targeting developers, system administrators, and power users who need a more powerful and insightful process monitoring solution, Appstat is positioned as a valuable tool for troubleshooting performance issues, identifying resource-intensive applications, and gaining a deeper understanding of system behavior. While it provides comprehensive data, the interface is designed to be accessible and intuitive, making it suitable for users with varying levels of technical expertise.

  • Windows
  • Process Monitor
  • System Monitoring
  • performance monitoring
  • Appstat
  • Software
  • utility
  • Debugging
  • Troubleshooting
  • resource usage
  • Real-Time Monitoring

  Summary of Comments ( 4 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43255855

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN users generally praised Appstat as a useful tool. Several pointed out its similarity to existing tools like Sysinternals Process Monitor (Procmon) while highlighting Appstat's simpler interface and easier setup as advantages. Some appreciated its focus on security-relevant events. Others suggested potential improvements, such as adding filtering capabilities, including command line arguments, and enhancing the UI with features like column sorting. A few users mentioned alternative tools they preferred, including Procmon and ETW Explorer. The developer actively responded to comments, addressing questions and acknowledging suggestions for future development.

  The Hacker News post for "Show HN: Appstat – Process Monitor for Windows" generated a moderate amount of discussion, with several commenters offering their perspectives and experiences.

  A significant portion of the conversation revolves around comparing Appstat to existing process monitoring tools, particularly Process Monitor (Procmon) from Sysinternals. Several users praise Procmon as a powerful and comprehensive tool, questioning whether Appstat offers enough unique features to justify its existence. One commenter points out the steep learning curve associated with Procmon, highlighting the need for simpler alternatives, particularly for less experienced users. They suggest Appstat could potentially fill this niche.

  The author of Appstat actively participates in the thread, responding to queries and providing clarification about its features. They emphasize the tool's focus on providing a more user-friendly interface compared to Procmon, acknowledging that Procmon offers greater depth in terms of data collection. They also discuss Appstat's specific use cases, such as troubleshooting application crashes and identifying performance bottlenecks. This direct engagement from the creator allows for a deeper understanding of the tool's purpose and intended audience.

  One commenter expresses skepticism about the cross-platform capabilities of Appstat, specifically questioning its performance on Linux. The author responds by acknowledging the current limitations of the Linux version and outlining future development plans. This exchange provides valuable insight into the current state of the project and its roadmap.

  Further discussion centers on the potential licensing model for Appstat. One commenter inquires about plans for open-sourcing the project. The author responds by stating that they are currently considering various options, including a potential dual-licensing approach. This suggests the possibility of both a free community edition and a paid commercial version.

  The overall sentiment within the comments section appears to be cautiously optimistic. While several users acknowledge the value of existing tools like Procmon, there's also a recognition that there's room for alternative solutions with different design philosophies and target user groups. The author's active participation and responsiveness to feedback contribute positively to the discussion, leaving a favorable impression of the project and its potential.

• Agent-Less System Monitoring with Elixir Broadway

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-18 14:53:44

  Verbose tl;dr

  This blog post demonstrates how to build an agent-less system monitoring tool using Elixir and Broadway. It leverages SSH to remotely execute commands on target machines, collecting metrics like CPU usage, memory consumption, and disk space. Broadway manages the concurrent execution of these commands across multiple hosts, providing scalability and fault tolerance. The collected data is then processed and displayed, offering a centralized overview of system performance. The author highlights the benefits of this approach, including simplified deployment (no agent installation required) and the inherent robustness of Elixir and its ecosystem. This method offers a lightweight yet powerful solution for monitoring server infrastructure.

  This blog post explores building a system monitoring solution using Elixir and Broadway, specifically focusing on an agent-less approach. The author argues that traditional agent-based monitoring, while offering granular data collection, introduces overhead and complexity through agent deployment and maintenance. Agent-less monitoring, leveraging protocols like SSH, offers a simplified alternative by querying systems directly without requiring resident software.

  The post begins by outlining the conceptual architecture of their solution. It details how Broadway, a concurrent and fault-tolerant processing library in Elixir, acts as the central processing engine. It receives monitoring tasks, distributes them to designated workers, and manages the results. Crucially, the chosen agent-less method utilizes SSH to execute commands remotely on target systems. The post emphasizes Broadway's robustness in handling potentially unreliable network operations inherent in SSH-based communication.

  The author then delves into the implementation specifics. They demonstrate setting up a Broadway pipeline configured to process monitoring tasks. These tasks are structured as messages containing the target hostname and the command to execute. The implementation leverages Erlang's SSH application to establish connections and execute commands remotely. A critical component highlighted is the error handling mechanism built around Broadway's retry and failure handling capabilities. This ensures resilience against transient network issues or temporary unavailability of target systems. The retrieved monitoring data is then processed and formatted, ready for storage or visualization.

  A key advantage emphasized is the flexibility afforded by this approach. The system can be readily extended to support various monitoring commands and metrics. Adding new systems to monitor only requires configuring the necessary connection details, without deploying any agents. The post also touches upon the scalability of the solution. Broadway's concurrent processing model allows for parallel execution of monitoring tasks, improving efficiency and reducing overall monitoring time. The author acknowledges potential security considerations associated with managing SSH credentials and advocates for secure storage and access control mechanisms.

  Finally, the post concludes by reiterating the benefits of the agent-less approach, highlighting its simplicity, scalability, and reduced overhead. It positions this approach as a compelling alternative to traditional agent-based solutions, especially in scenarios where agent deployment is impractical or undesirable. The author suggests potential future enhancements, such as integrating with different data visualization tools and exploring alternative agent-less protocols.

  • Elixir
  • Broadway
  • System Monitoring
  • Agentless Monitoring
  • Observability
  • DevOps
  • distributed systems
  • Erlang
  • OTP
  • concurrency
  • fault tolerance
  • scalability
  • performance monitoring
  • Real-Time Monitoring

  Summary of Comments ( 16 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43090167

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users discussed the practicality and benefits of the agentless approach to system monitoring described in the linked blog post. Several commenters appreciated the simplicity and reduced overhead of not needing to install agents on monitored machines. Some raised concerns about potential security implications of running commands remotely via SSH and the potential performance bottlenecks of doing so. Others questioned the scalability of this method, particularly for large numbers of monitored systems. The discussion also touched on alternative approaches like using message queues and the potential benefits of Elixir's concurrency features for this type of monitoring system. A compelling comment suggested exploring the use of OSquery for efficient data gathering, which prompted further discussion on its pros and cons. Finally, some commenters expressed interest in the author's open-sourcing of their project.

  The Hacker News post titled "Agent-Less System Monitoring with Elixir Broadway" sparked a small but focused discussion with 5 comments. No single comment overwhelmingly dominated the conversation, but several offered interesting perspectives on the article's topic.

  One commenter questioned the term "agent-less," pointing out that while the system described doesn't require installing dedicated agent software on monitored machines, it still relies on SSH access, which functionally acts like an agent. They argued that this approach trades one set of tradeoffs (agent installation and maintenance) for another (managing SSH keys and potential security concerns).

  Another comment focused on the choice of Erlang/Elixir for this type of task. They acknowledged the platform's strengths in concurrency and distributed systems but expressed concern about the operational overhead and debugging complexity compared to simpler scripting solutions, especially for smaller deployments. They suggested that the benefits of Elixir might become more pronounced with larger and more complex monitoring setups.

  A third commenter praised the article's clear explanation and the elegant approach to building a robust monitoring system with Broadway. They highlighted the benefits of leveraging Elixir's OTP framework for handling failures and ensuring reliability.

  The remaining comments were shorter and less substantive. One simply expressed appreciation for the article, while another briefly mentioned using a similar approach with a different technology.

  Overall, the comments section, while brief, provided some thoughtful critiques and perspectives on the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed agent-less monitoring approach using Elixir and Broadway. The discussion centered on the practical implications of SSH as an "agent" substitute and the suitability of Elixir/OTP for this kind of task in different scales of deployment.

• Grafana: Why observability needs FinOps, and vice versa

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-06 19:13:34

  Verbose tl;dr

  Observability and FinOps are increasingly intertwined, and integrating them provides significant benefits. This blog post highlights the newly launched Vantage integration with Grafana Cloud, which allows users to combine cost data with observability metrics. By correlating resource usage with cost, teams can identify optimization opportunities, understand the financial impact of performance issues, and make informed decisions about resource allocation. This integration enables better control over cloud spending, faster troubleshooting, and more efficient infrastructure management by providing a single pane of glass for both technical performance and financial analysis. Ultimately, it empowers organizations to achieve a balance between performance and cost.

  The Grafana blog post, "Why observability needs FinOps, and vice versa: The Vantage integration with Grafana Cloud," emphasizes the synergistic relationship between observability and FinOps (cloud financial operations), arguing that each discipline significantly enhances the other, leading to more efficient and cost-effective cloud usage. The integration of Vantage, a FinOps platform by Google Cloud, with Grafana Cloud is presented as a practical example of this synergy.

  The post begins by highlighting the challenges faced by organizations adopting cloud technologies, particularly the difficulty in understanding and managing cloud costs. It argues that traditional cost management tools are insufficient for the dynamic and complex nature of cloud environments. Observability, with its focus on detailed insights into system performance and behavior, is positioned as a crucial component for gaining a deeper understanding of cost drivers. By correlating cost data with operational metrics, organizations can identify areas of inefficiency, optimize resource allocation, and ultimately reduce cloud spend.

  Conversely, the post argues that FinOps practices benefit observability efforts. By understanding the cost implications of different observability strategies, organizations can make informed decisions about data collection, retention, and analysis. This prevents overspending on excessive data ingestion and storage while ensuring that sufficient data is available for effective monitoring and troubleshooting.

  The integration of Vantage with Grafana Cloud is presented as a key enabler of this bidirectional benefit. Vantage brings granular cost and usage data into the Grafana ecosystem, allowing users to visualize, analyze, and correlate cost information with other operational metrics within a single platform. This unified view empowers teams to pinpoint cost anomalies, investigate their root causes, and implement corrective actions.

  The post provides specific examples of how the integration can be leveraged, such as identifying idle or underutilized resources, tracking the cost of specific applications or services, and analyzing the impact of code changes on cloud spend. It highlights features like cost-optimized alerting, which allows users to set thresholds for cost-related metrics and receive notifications when those thresholds are exceeded. This proactive approach enables teams to address cost issues before they escalate.

  Furthermore, the blog post emphasizes the collaborative aspect of FinOps and observability, suggesting that bringing together engineering, finance, and operations teams through a shared platform fosters better communication and alignment around cost optimization goals. This cross-functional collaboration is crucial for implementing effective FinOps strategies and realizing the full potential of cloud cost savings. The post concludes by reiterating the importance of integrating FinOps and observability for achieving sustainable cloud financial management and driving business value.

  • Grafana
  • Observability
  • FinOps
  • Cloud Cost Management
  • Cost Optimization
  • Monitoring
  • Vantage
  • Integration
  • Cloud Computing
  • DevOps
  • SRE
  • Infrastructure Monitoring
  • performance monitoring
  • AIOps

  Summary of Comments ( 5 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42965499

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters generally express skepticism about the purported synergy between FinOps and observability. Several suggest that while cost visibility is important, integrating FinOps directly into observability platforms like Grafana might be overkill, creating unnecessary complexity and vendor lock-in. They argue for maintaining separate tools and focusing on clear cost allocation tagging strategies instead. Some also point out potential conflicts of interest, with engineering teams prioritizing performance over cost and finance teams lacking the technical expertise to interpret complex observability data. A few commenters see some value in the integration for specific use cases like anomaly detection and right-sizing resources, but the prevailing sentiment is one of cautious pragmatism.

  The Hacker News post "Grafana: Why observability needs FinOps, and vice versa" has generated a few comments, primarily focusing on the increasing costs associated with observability tools and the complexities of managing them effectively.

  One commenter highlights the irony of needing cost management tools for the very systems meant to monitor and optimize other systems. They express a sentiment that the ever-expanding tooling ecosystem for cloud infrastructure creates a cycle of needing more tools to manage the previous set of tools. This resonates with the idea that observability, while crucial, can become a significant expense if not carefully managed.

  Another commenter points out the inherent conflict between the detailed data collection required for effective observability and the associated costs. They argue that "observability is in direct tension with saving money." This implies that the desire for granular insights often leads to increased storage and processing costs, creating a trade-off between visibility and affordability. They further suggest that cost analysis within observability systems should be a core feature, not an afterthought, to help manage this tension.

  A third commenter expresses frustration with the current state of observability and monitoring tools. They claim that such tools often become bloated and difficult to manage. They call for simpler, more focused tools that provide crucial metrics without unnecessary complexity, ultimately aiming for a more manageable and cost-effective solution. This sentiment aligns with the overall discussion around the escalating costs and complexities of maintaining comprehensive observability.

  The discussion, while concise, revolves around the practical challenges of implementing observability. The comments emphasize the need for better cost management practices within observability tools themselves, highlighting the growing tension between the benefits of detailed monitoring and the increasing financial burden it can impose.

• Stats – macOS system monitor in your menu bar

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-30 19:37:42

  Verbose tl;dr

  Stats is a free and open-source macOS menu bar application that provides a comprehensive overview of system performance. It displays real-time information on CPU usage, memory, network activity, disk usage, battery health, and fan speeds, all within a customizable and compact menu bar interface. Users can tailor the displayed modules and their appearance to suit their needs, choosing from various graph styles and refresh rates. Stats aims to be a lightweight yet powerful alternative to larger system monitoring tools.

  The GitHub repository, stats by user exelban, introduces a macOS application that provides real-time system monitoring directly within the menu bar. This application offers a compact and readily accessible overview of vital system statistics, eliminating the need to open larger, more resource-intensive applications like Activity Monitor. The displayed information is highly configurable, allowing users to customize which metrics are visible and how they are presented.

  Among the available metrics are CPU usage, broken down by individual core utilization and overall system load; memory usage, including details on used, wired, compressed, and cached memory; disk activity, displaying read and write speeds for connected drives; network activity, showing upload and download speeds for active network interfaces; battery status, providing information on current charge level and time remaining; and sensor data, encompassing temperatures and fan speeds for various system components.

  stats offers a high degree of visual customization. Users can select from various pre-built themes or create their own, tailoring the appearance of the menu bar display to match their preferences or system aesthetics. The level of detail shown can also be adjusted, allowing users to choose between concise summaries and more comprehensive breakdowns of system resource usage. This flexibility makes stats adaptable to different user needs and workflows.

  The application is built using Swift and leverages native macOS APIs, potentially leading to efficient performance and seamless integration with the operating system. The project is open-source and hosted on GitHub, enabling community contributions and further development. The readily available source code allows for transparency and potential customization beyond the provided configuration options. While offering a comprehensive suite of features out-of-the-box, the open-source nature suggests the possibility of extending its functionality further based on user needs and community input.

  • macOS
  • system monitor
  • menu bar
  • utility
  • performance monitoring
  • resource usage
  • CPU
  • Memory
  • disk
  • network
  • Open Source
  • GitHub
  • Stats

  Summary of Comments ( 5 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42881342

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users generally praised Stats' minimalist design and useful information display in the menu bar. Some suggested improvements, including customizable refresh rates, more detailed CPU information (like per-core usage), and GPU temperature monitoring for M1 Macs. Others questioned the need for another system monitor given existing options, with some pointing to iStat Menus as a more mature alternative. The developer responded to several comments, acknowledging the suggestions and clarifying current limitations and future plans. Some users appreciated the open-source nature of the project and the developer's responsiveness. There was also a minor discussion around the chosen license (GPLv3).

  The Hacker News post for "Stats – macOS system monitor in your menu bar" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42881342) has a moderate number of comments discussing various aspects of the application and system monitoring tools in general.

  Several commenters praise Stats' clean design and comprehensive feature set, contrasting it favorably to other menu bar monitors. One user appreciates its ability to display network speeds directly in the menu bar, a feature they find particularly useful. Others highlight the detailed graphs and customization options available within the app.

  A recurring theme in the comments is the discussion of alternative system monitoring tools. Some users mention iStat Menus as a long-time favorite, while others suggest BitBar and MenuMeters as viable free alternatives. The comparison often revolves around the balance between features, performance impact, and cost, with some users expressing concerns about Stats' potential resource usage compared to simpler solutions.

  The developer of Stats actively participates in the comment section, addressing user questions and feedback. They clarify licensing details, explain the rationale behind certain design choices, and acknowledge areas for potential improvement, like optimizing CPU usage. This direct engagement with the community is seen positively by several commenters.

  A few users raise concerns about the privacy implications of running third-party monitoring tools, particularly those that require elevated permissions. This sparks a brief discussion about the trade-offs between functionality and privacy.

  One commenter points out the challenge of achieving a truly lightweight system monitor, suggesting that the desire for comprehensive data inevitably leads to increased resource consumption. This comment highlights the inherent tension between feature richness and performance optimization in this type of software.

  Finally, there are some specific technical queries and suggestions related to features like GPU monitoring and network interface selection. These comments provide valuable feedback for the developer and contribute to a discussion about the specific needs of users in different contexts.