Xymon Mailing List Archive search

oversized [ports] section && 'stopped reporting' -> feature request (bug ?)

2 messages in this thread

list Jerry Yu · Tue, 8 Aug 2006 09:32:50 -0400 ·
anyway the size limit can be applied invididually for each check, such that
an oversized [ports] or any other section won't vitimize other 'good'
sections and cause them dataless in the RRD?

On 8/7/06, Jerry Yu <user-764c1f364fe0@xymon.invalid> wrote:
thanks, I doubled MAXMSG_CLIENT MAXMSG_STATUS as well as MAXMSG_DATA from
their default values. That seem to have eliminated the truncation line for
PORTS data and oversize status/stachg messages for Hobbitd.
after "/etc/init.d/hobbit stop" and 'kill -TERM' the remaining vmstat
processes, I had to 'ipcrm' one last shm segment.


On 8/6/06, Henrik Stoerner <user-ce4a2c883f75@xymon.invalid> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 09:54:04AM -0400, Jerry Yu wrote:
one of our servers have  up to 6000 TIME_WAIT tcp connections from
time to
time. This got truncated, of course.  I want to see them all. any
quick way
to change the upper limit w/o recompilation ?
Set the MAXMSG_CLIENT setting in hobbitserver.cfg and restart Hobbit.
The default is 512 (KB) for the maximum size of a client message.

If you want them all to show up on the status display, you probably also

have to increase the MAXMSG_STATUS setting.

The hobbitserver.cfg man-page describes these.

Also, for the same server, from time to time, certain checks 'stopped
reporting' [ files & msgs, in particular ] for some extended period,
sometimes over 35m, while other checks kept going. I wonder if the
message
truncation triggered by the over-sized [ports] section caused this
loss.
It could very well be due to this. The [files] and [msgs] sections of
the client message appear after the network ports listing, so if the
message was truncated these could be lost.


Regards,
Henrik

list Henrik Størner · Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:14:43 +0200 ·
quoted from Jerry Yu
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 09:32:50AM -0400, Jerry Yu wrote:
anyway the size limit can be applied invididually for each check, such that
an oversized [ports] or any other section won't vitimize other 'good'
sections and cause them dataless in the RRD?
No, not with the current design of the client.


Regards,
henrik