Perhaps it should be "wcping" as in "water-cooled ping"!
GLH
-----Original Message-----
From: Henrik Stoerner [mailto:user-ce4a2c883f75@xymon.invalid] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 9:37 AM
To: user-ae9b8668bcde@xymon.invalid
Subject: Re: [hobbit] fping tuning
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:03:30AM -0400, Schwimmer, Eric E *HS wrote:
I've had a look at the fping sources.
There aren't any really obvious reasons why it should take so long.
If you run it with "time", it also claims that the user- and > system-time are really low (I tried with ~1500 hosts), but the > wall-clock time is like 90 seconds (default options). Which kind of > points at the code not really doing parallel pings.
I think I'll try some modifications to it over the week-end. If any > of it seems to improve it, I'll let you know.
I gave the source a quick peruse before sending my initial email, and my gut was telling me likewise. Thanks for looking in to it :)
Just an update on this:
As some have noticed - because it didn't compile - I have cooked up a
"hobbitping" utility to replace fping. On my system, fping took about 90
seconds to do a full sweep of the hosts. hobbitping takes 17 seconds, of
which 15 are a static 3x5 seconds delay while the non-responding hosts
timeout.
Eric was so kind as to confirm that it works on his system as well.
So it's goodbye fping - hello hobbitping.
Regards,
Henrik