Xymon Mailing List Archive search

BBWin Virtual Memory

6 messages in this thread

list Johan Sjöberg · Fri, 5 Mar 2010 13:03:52 +0100 ·
Hi.

I am posting this here, since the BBWin project seems (even more) dead.

I have been trying to figure out what the different values in BBWin's memory test are. During this, I noticed that the "Virtual" size is shown as 2047MB for all our Windows clients, regardless of the real size of the virtual memory. Has anyone else noticied this?

Also, it seems like the "Real" memory indicator mentioned in the help file does not work at all.

What alarm levels do you people use for Memory in BBWin? We have previously only been using "Virtual" for alarms, but with the recent discovery that seems like a very bad idea.

/Johan
list John · Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:29:47 -0600 ·
Physical and Virtual memory reports fine for me, I have 0.12 installed
on a number of 2003 and 2008 servers. Do you have static pagefile
sizes set? I'm not sure how BBWin looks for virtual memory usage, but
if it's just doing a filesize check on your page file that might
explain it.

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Johan Sjöberg
quoted from Johan Sjöberg
<user-74c177c1220d@xymon.invalid> wrote:
Hi.


I am posting this here, since the BBWin project seems (even more) dead.


I have been trying to figure out what the different values in BBWin’s memory
test are. During this, I noticed that the “Virtual” size is shown as 2047MB
for all our Windows clients, regardless of the real size of the virtual
memory. Has anyone else noticied this?


Also, it seems like the “Real” memory indicator mentioned in the help file
does not work at all.


What alarm levels do you people use for Memory in BBWin? We have previously
only been using “Virtual” for alarms, but with the recent discovery that
seems like a very bad idea.


/Johan
list Shawn Heisey · Fri, 05 Mar 2010 07:55:20 -0700 ·
I use Hobbit 4.2 as my production server, and I don't have any Windows clients pointing at Xymon right now.  I am currently using BBWin in local configuration mode because it's going to be a sizable time investment to switch.  I am waiting until I am ready to replace the production server and upgrade to Xymon before changing to central config mode.  I hope that these possible differences don't make my installation so different as to make what I'm saying useless.  If so, hopefully someone who knows will speak up.

The virtual (shows up as "actual" on the graph), as you have noticed, is useless.  On all of my systems, it shows 32 used out of 2047.  The physical memory (shows up as "real" in the graph) is actual physical memory, but it's *mostly* a useless figure as well.  The page value (shows up as swap in the graph) is the one that seems to really matter.  It is the overall usage of both physical memory and the pagefile.  Be aware that if the ratio of real memory to pagefile on your systems varies widely (as it does in my network), you will end up needing very different alarm thresholds for each of your systems.  Adjusting that ratio is the only way I've found to bring parity, but the biggest problems tend to be on the older systems, which usually don't have enough disk space to accomodate a change.

Shawn
quoted from Johan Sjöberg


On 3/5/2010 5:03 AM, Johan Sjöberg wrote:
Hi.

I am posting this here, since the BBWin project seems (even more) dead.

I have been trying to figure out what the different values in BBWin's memory test are. During this, I noticed that the "Virtual" size is shown as 2047MB for all our Windows clients, regardless of the real size of the virtual memory. Has anyone else noticied this?

Also, it seems like the "Real" memory indicator mentioned in the help file does not work at all.

What alarm levels do you people use for Memory in BBWin? We have previously only been using "Virtual" for alarms, but with the recent discovery that seems like a very bad idea.

/Johan
list Johan Sjöberg · Fri, 5 Mar 2010 16:06:52 +0100 ·
Hi.

I have tried with both static and dynamic virtual memory size. The virtual memory size always shows up as 2047 MB regardless. Physical and Page size and usage seem to be correct though.

Here is an example of how physical and virtual does not add up to the Page value, as it should. This machine has 12 GB of physical memory, and a dynamically sized virtual memory which is currently around 12 GB as well.

   Memory    Used   Total  Pctg
Physical:    6652M  12277M   54%
Virtual:       59M   2047M    2%
Page:        6945M  24553M   28%

/Johan
quoted from John

-----Original Message-----
From: user-6be588332615@xymon.invalid [mailto:user-6be588332615@xymon.invalid] On Behalf Of John
Sent: den 5 mars 2010 15:30
To: user-ae9b8668bcde@xymon.invalid
Subject: Re: [hobbit] BBWin Virtual Memory

Physical and Virtual memory reports fine for me, I have 0.12 installed
on a number of 2003 and 2008 servers. Do you have static pagefile
sizes set? I'm not sure how BBWin looks for virtual memory usage, but
if it's just doing a filesize check on your page file that might
explain it.

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Johan Sjöberg
<user-74c177c1220d@xymon.invalid> wrote:
Hi.


I am posting this here, since the BBWin project seems (even more) dead.


I have been trying to figure out what the different values in BBWin's memory
test are. During this, I noticed that the "Virtual" size is shown as 2047MB
for all our Windows clients, regardless of the real size of the virtual
memory. Has anyone else noticied this?


Also, it seems like the "Real" memory indicator mentioned in the help file
does not work at all.


What alarm levels do you people use for Memory in BBWin? We have previously
only been using "Virtual" for alarms, but with the recent discovery that
seems like a very bad idea.


/Johan
list Malcolm Hunter · Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:53:46 +0100 ·
quoted from Johan Sjöberg
Physical and Virtual memory reports fine for me, I have 0.12 installed
on a number of 2003 and 2008 servers. Do you have static pagefile
sizes set? I'm not sure how BBWin looks for virtual memory usage, but
if it's just doing a filesize check on your page file that might
explain it.
Really? What mode are you using? Central or Local? I have the same problem in local mode.

For example:

Server: OS = Windows 2003 SP2, RAM = 512MB, Pagefile = 1000MB

BBwin reports: Physical: 511M, Virtual: 2047M, Page: 1489M

Something is obviously amiss. I'm not really surprised having seen some of the code behind the scenes. There are also less severe issues with disk space calculations.

Malcolm


-- 
Technical copy-editor & proofreader

KDE Proofreading Team
KDE British English Translation Team

http://l10n.kde.org/team-infos.php?teamcode=en_GB

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/FriendlyAtheist

Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser -
jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/chbrowser
list John · Fri, 5 Mar 2010 12:51:19 -0600 ·
I run in central mode, and I have not tried local mode. Looking at one
of the servers, the virtual memory size is a little bit off, which
makes me want to check the rest of my servers. Just glancing at the
graphs in hobbit for 24 different windows 03/08 servers, and none are
reporting a static Virtual Memory size. Physical RAM is accurate, and
Actual RAM is bogus (always a small number (<50MB usually)).

Server: OS = Windows 2003 SP2
RAM = 320MB avail 1024MB total
Pagefile = Min 2048 Max 4092 Current 834MB pagefile.sys size 2046MB

BBwin reports:
Physical: 706MB used, 1023MB total
Virtual: 812MB used, 2980MB total
quoted from Malcolm Hunter

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Malcolm Hunter <user-b3e590ffeb6d@xymon.invalid> wrote:
Physical and Virtual memory reports fine for me, I have 0.12 installed
on a number of 2003 and 2008 servers. Do you have static pagefile
sizes set? I'm not sure how BBWin looks for virtual memory usage, but
if it's just doing a filesize check on your page file that might
explain it.
Really? What mode are you using? Central or Local? I have the same problem in local mode.

For example:

Server: OS = Windows 2003 SP2, RAM = 512MB, Pagefile = 1000MB

BBwin reports: Physical: 511M, Virtual: 2047M, Page: 1489M

Something is obviously amiss. I'm not really surprised having seen some of the code behind the scenes. There are also less severe issues with disk space calculations.

Malcolm


--
Technical copy-editor & proofreader

KDE Proofreading Team
KDE British English Translation Team

http://l10n.kde.org/team-infos.php?teamcode=en_GB

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/FriendlyAtheist

Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser -
jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/chbrowser