Re: Q: server monitoring
Holger Eitzenberger wrote on Apr 29, 2004 at 09:46:33 PM: > Hi, > > can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) > some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? What > other free tools are available? > Have a look at these, they are a little more lightweight than nagios: Argus - http://argus.tcp4me.com/ nefu - http://rsug.itd.umich.edu/software/nefu/ Regards, -- .- David Hardne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `-- wget -O- tx.se/dh|gpg --import -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
blind date sign-up
One of your buddies hooked you up on a date with another buddy. Your invitation: http://matchingforloving.com/confirm/?oc=53031179 A FREE dating web site CREATED BY WOMEN
blind date sign-up
One of your buddies hooked you up on a date with another buddy. Your invitation: http://matchingforloving.com/confirm/?oc=53031179 A FREE dating web site CREATED BY WOMEN
Re: Q: server monitoring
Hello, it really depends on how the monitoring system will be used. I personally use nagios at my current employer, and am quite happy with it. It's very extensible as you can easily write your own plugins to monitor things specific to your company. As well there is quite a large community, so support is there (commercial support is also available) and also lots of addons and plugins. But if you need just basic up/down monitoring you might want to look else where for something a little more simpler. On 29-Apr-04, at 3:46 PM, Holger Eitzenberger wrote: Hi, can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? What other free tools are available? Thx in advance. /Holger -- ++ GnuPG Key -> http://www.t-online.de/~holger.eitzenberger ++ Sean McAvoy Network Analyst Megawheels Technologies Inc. Phone: 416.360-8211 x242 Fax:416.360.1403 Cell: 416.616.6599
Re: Q: server monitoring
Hello, > can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) > some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? I am going to install it, but I am waiting like you :) so if you will have some recommendation I will be glad of any information :) > What other free tools are available? maybe: http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/1_0/about.html#othermonitors I think all good (and not goot) tools. search the net or Freshmeat Angel Network Monitor Autostatus HiWAyS MARS Mon Netup (French) NocMonitor NodeWatch Penemo PIKT RITW Scotty Spong Sysmon links on the page given above. > Thx in advance. You are welcome :P -- Marcin.
Re: Q: server monitoring
Hello, it really depends on how the monitoring system will be used. I personally use nagios at my current employer, and am quite happy with it. It's very extensible as you can easily write your own plugins to monitor things specific to your company. As well there is quite a large community, so support is there (commercial support is also available) and also lots of addons and plugins. But if you need just basic up/down monitoring you might want to look else where for something a little more simpler. On 29-Apr-04, at 3:46 PM, Holger Eitzenberger wrote: Hi, can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? What other free tools are available? Thx in advance. /Holger -- ++ GnuPG Key -> http://www.t-online.de/~holger.eitzenberger ++ Sean McAvoy Network Analyst Megawheels Technologies Inc. Phone: 416.360-8211 x242 Fax:416.360.1403 Cell: 416.616.6599 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Q: server monitoring
Hello, > can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) > some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? I am going to install it, but I am waiting like you :) so if you will have some recommendation I will be glad of any information :) > What other free tools are available? maybe: http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/1_0/about.html#othermonitors I think all good (and not goot) tools. search the net or Freshmeat Angel Network Monitor Autostatus HiWAyS MARS Mon Netup (French) NocMonitor NodeWatch Penemo PIKT RITW Scotty Spong Sysmon links on the page given above. > Thx in advance. You are welcome :P -- Marcin. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Q: server monitoring
Hi, can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? What other free tools are available? Thx in advance. /Holger -- ++ GnuPG Key -> http://www.t-online.de/~holger.eitzenberger ++ pgpyMS1vZvHFe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: restricting process limit
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 03:18:57AM -0400, George Georgalis wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 02:59:12PM +1000, Daniel Pittman wrote: > >On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Dan Christensen wrote: > >> Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, George Georgalis wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 06:44:35PM +0200, LeVA wrote: > >So when I'm getting a large amount of messages there is approx. > >15-20 spamc/spamd running. I want to limit this to ~5. > I suspect if spamc invokes spamd but spamd reached its max-children > then spamc will act as if spamd timed out, or report ham. > >>> That depends on the options you pass to spamc; I pass -x which says > >>> "report a temp failure in that case", and advise that for general > >>> use. > >> I'm not sure if this is helpful to the original poster, but I invoke > >> spamc from within procmail, and use a lockfile to limit it to one > >> invocation at a time. > >> Does anyone see a problem with this setup? (I use exim as my MTA.) > >No, no problem. This is a pretty high overhead solution, though, and > >the original question was about limiting that overhead. :) > yep. SA is high overhead. the annoying thing is that besides all the > > SA seems the only real choice for an OSS spam filter, but I find the > api, poor, and looking at the code tells me resource efficiency was never > a consideration either. > > I'm wanting to write a program that process mail through SA modules, > but more efficiently. I'm surprised I've not found one out there already. > Maybe scrubber is the answer? http://projects.gasperino.org/scrubber/ > (don't know yet...) I've had good success with MailScanner which uses SpamAssassin as a perl library. It does not use spamc or spamd. If I understand correctly this approach has far less overhead than the procmail/spamc/spamd approach. http://mailscanner.info -Eric Rz.
Q: server monitoring
Hi, can someone recommend a tool to monitor (hardware, network, ...) some linux servers, e. g. nagios (www.nagios.org)? What other free tools are available? Thx in advance. /Holger -- ++ GnuPG Key -> http://www.t-online.de/~holger.eitzenberger ++ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: restricting process limit
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 03:18:57AM -0400, George Georgalis wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 02:59:12PM +1000, Daniel Pittman wrote: > >On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Dan Christensen wrote: > >> Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, George Georgalis wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 06:44:35PM +0200, LeVA wrote: > >So when I'm getting a large amount of messages there is approx. > >15-20 spamc/spamd running. I want to limit this to ~5. > I suspect if spamc invokes spamd but spamd reached its max-children > then spamc will act as if spamd timed out, or report ham. > >>> That depends on the options you pass to spamc; I pass -x which says > >>> "report a temp failure in that case", and advise that for general > >>> use. > >> I'm not sure if this is helpful to the original poster, but I invoke > >> spamc from within procmail, and use a lockfile to limit it to one > >> invocation at a time. > >> Does anyone see a problem with this setup? (I use exim as my MTA.) > >No, no problem. This is a pretty high overhead solution, though, and > >the original question was about limiting that overhead. :) > yep. SA is high overhead. the annoying thing is that besides all the > > SA seems the only real choice for an OSS spam filter, but I find the > api, poor, and looking at the code tells me resource efficiency was never > a consideration either. > > I'm wanting to write a program that process mail through SA modules, > but more efficiently. I'm surprised I've not found one out there already. > Maybe scrubber is the answer? http://projects.gasperino.org/scrubber/ > (don't know yet...) I've had good success with MailScanner which uses SpamAssassin as a perl library. It does not use spamc or spamd. If I understand correctly this approach has far less overhead than the procmail/spamc/spamd approach. http://mailscanner.info -Eric Rz. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
