Clovertech

Origin of the name "Network Monitor"?

› Clovertech Forums › Read Only Archives › Cloverleaf › General › Origin of the name "Network Monitor"?

  • Creator
    Topic
  • November 27, 2006 at 5:08 am #48908
    David Teh
    Participant

      Ok, this is more for the fun of it.

      Anyone knows why the “Network Monitor” is called the “Network Monitor”?

      I have always found it odd, as it is definitely not monitoring the network. 🙂

    • Creator
      Topic
    Viewing 3 reply threads
    • Author
      Replies
      • November 27, 2006 at 9:55 am #60072
        Robert Kersemakers
        Participant

          I agree: ‘Thread Monitor’ sounds way cooler… 8)

          Zuyderland Medisch Centrum; Heerlen/Sittard; The Netherlands

        • November 27, 2006 at 4:33 pm #60073
          Chris Williams
          Participant

            “Network” has a certain cachet. “Thread Monitor” sounds like the teacher’s pet in a sewing class.

          • January 11, 2007 at 5:15 pm #60074
            Anonymous
            Participant

              Well, I guess it is because it monitor’s the internal Cloverleaf “network” of threads and interfaces.  But if you think about it, in a way it does monitor your hospitals network.  If a network is down or a connection to an ancillary system is severed for any reason, then your Cloverleaf thread will go to in “opening” status and will return “up” again once that connection has been re-established.   There have been times when our alerts on the Cloverleaf engine have been the first to identify a problem with either a network problem or a connectivity in general.

              So I guess the name “Network Monitor” is a good name!

              Tom Rioux

            • January 11, 2007 at 11:15 pm #60075
              David Teh
              Participant

                Hi Thomas,

                I too can attest to the fact that usually Cloverleaf operators are the first to take action although the real problem lies elsewhere. 🙂

                But, in a true sense, the other systems jolly well have their own monitoring mechanisms. Should there be a hard break, either due to network or the other system’s failure, Cloverleaf may not receive any TCP/IP segment to disconnect. The thread remains ‘UP’ 🙂

                Thomas G Rioux wrote:

                Well, I guess it is because it monitor’s the internal Cloverleaf “network” of threads and interfaces.

            • Author
              Replies
            Viewing 3 reply threads
            • The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.