On 10 August 2010 07:12, Sebastian Ries <sebastian.r...@dtnet.de> wrote: > Hi > > as I'm not sure if my first attempt to send this message did work here i post > it the second time: > > I have the following Problem: > > We have some Processes which are running but are idle for some time > (maybe some weeks) and the get used by a user. > While a single Process is used is should have a cpu usage varying > between 10 and 50%. > We have the problem that sometimes a process gets stuck and then is > running at 100% cpu usage. > => this is what we want to check via Nagios. > > I tried to use check_procs like: > ./check_procs -w 80 -c 90 --metric=CPU --command=qemu-system-x86 > but this did noch catch the processes. > > After some testing and searching on the internet I found out that this > is depending on how ps calculates the cpu usage: > It devides the cputime by the runtime of the process, giving the average > cup usage over the whole process time -> which does not really help :-( > > Does anyone know of an alternative check which gives me the cpu usage > actual of a process (or maybe the average over the last minute)?
"ps -ocputime" will give you the total cputime used since the process started. You could code a plugin which stores this then next time it's run will calculate the %cpu from the difference between the old and new values. It's a bit of a dirty solution, but this kind of thing is done in some of the snmp plugins for checking interface traffic counters for example http://nagios.manubulon.com/snmp_int.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null