20 March,2017 by Jack Vamvas
Should you monitor a non production environment?
In large ITIL environments , the focus tends to be on the Production environment. Incident management , Problem management and the change request process are focused on Production.
It makes sense. Usually there are limited resources and ensuring there is no service impact is a top priority.
But , outages in non production environments can have a severe impact causing project deadline delays and cost impact.
Pros of monitoring a non – production environment
Developers rely on the Non-Production environment. If the environment is unavailable , developers | testers | vendor support cannot work. This is an added expense to the company.
Maintaining a similar set of alerts and responses for both environments production and non production can standardise and simplify the process . As a DBA I want to be responsible for the uptime of the database servers but this should be weighed up against resources .
Cons of monitoring a non production environment
Monitoring the non production environment is an overhead to the Operations team . The Operations team could be monitoring and responding thousands of Production servers . These servers have been (hopefully) deployed using a certified approach , including the applications installed, such as SQL Server.
Quite often the test environment is set up in a slightly different resource allocation to Production therefore a separate process is required to maintain the
Whatever decision, deciding Monitoring non production v production it is important to have the process documented – and give thought to aspects of the controls existing in production.
The issues get more complicated in a DevOps environment. You’ll have continuous testing , continuous deployment and to validate the integrity of the first two steps we’ll have continuous monitoring.