No, when all of the check start failing, the remote system won't even respond on the Dell IP based KVM. XP is seriously frozen and requires a physical power recycle.
I have kicked around the idea of doing some local perfmon checks to log and graph with RRD which would help watch memory consumption for example. -R > Can you do a NET VIEW towards those remote system from your XP system and > from other systems? > > > Dirk Bulinckx. > -----Original Message----- > From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 5:01 PM > To: Servers Alive Discussion List > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally > > The remote side of the checks are almost exclusively on Windows 2000 Pro > and > Server. With some hitting 2003 server. I am not checking any systems that > are running XP. > >> Are those checks on the WinXP system or on a remote system? >> >> >> >> Dirk Bulinckx. >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 4:41 PM >> To: Servers Alive Discussion List >> Subject: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally >> >> I am having a troubling condition with Servers Alive running on >> Windows XP Professional. After running for a period of time (this >> time it has been up for 4 days), all of the complex checks like >> Windows Process checks, file checks, print spoolers, cpu and >> pagespace, etc. fail with a message similar >> to: >> >> Clframe1 % CPU (DOWN) 100% CPU check (running at Not enough resources >> are available to complete this operation. %, check time: 187 ms) >> >> So my first question is, Should I be using something other than >> Windows XP (i.e. Windows 2000 or 2003)? My SA v4 never had this issue, >> though I have added a lot more perfmon based checks and com based >> checks, and RRD logging and graphing. I am stumped and hate the >> thought that the fix is a daily reboot of the servers alive system. >> >> Thanks in advance! >> >> Rob Petty >> >> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >> salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office >> messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to >> the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this >> will get you removed from the list. >> >> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >> salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office >> messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to >> the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this >> will get you removed from the list. >> > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office > messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the > individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get > you > removed from the list. > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > salive@woodstone.nu > If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make > sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of > the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the > list. > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to salive@woodstone.nu If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list.
