Re: [Nagios-users] Installation help - CentOS 4.4 Server
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > CentOS 4.4 > > thanks - I will give those a try. Personally, I like installing the packages from the RPMForge/Dag Wieers Yum repository. It's much simpler that way, and I also use CentOS 4.4. % wget http://dag.wieers.com/rpm/packages/rpmforge-release/rpmforge-release-0.3.6-1.el4.rf.i386.rpm % rpm -Uvh rpmforge-release-0.3.6-1.el4.rf.i386.rpm % yum install nagios nagios-plugins :) -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ 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
Re: [Nagios-users] Scheduling queue falling behind.
Morris, Patrick wrote: >> I'm not sure this is the right place to ask this, but I've >> been trying to figure out why the scheduling queue on my >> nagios server is always 20-30 minutes behind the current >> time. I ran into something like this, not that long ago. Host and service check latencies being very high, like almost 15-20 minutes. After some research, the suggested fix was to modify the check_host_alive and related commands. Change them so they only use a single packet to check. Add "-p 1" as a flag to your ping-type check commands. Once I followed this advice, my average latency went from 900 seconds or so, to usually less than a second. We monitor about 250-300 devices, 95% of them only have a single service check. (Usually SNMP) -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ 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
Re: [Nagios-users] GroundWork Monitor and GroundWork Foundation
> Has anyone evaluated > either GroundWork Monitor Open Source or GroundWork Monitor > Professional? I have used Nagios for many years, ever since before it was called Nagios. It's my preferred open-source monitoring solution. I've also put a lot of time over the years into looking for GUI interface options for Nagios. I, myself, live all day in VI, and I rarely even have X11 installed on my servers. But for others I work with, novice-friendly web interfaces can be real nice. That being said, I like what Groundwork has done a lot. I only discovered what they were doing in the last 6-12 months. Before that, I was generally not satisfied with the quality and features of Nagios GUI options. I've been using the open-source version of Groundwork's package, the latest stable version. (4.5.11, I believe) It made it VERY easy to set up a new server and install all required software. (One big RPM package, mainly) I was also greatly impressed with the quality of the GUI itself. It seems to give easier options for setting up some things, as well as nicer security access options. I highly recommend anyone trying to set up Nagios consider the open-source Groundwork package. For Nagios veterans, well, I'd probably still recommend it about as highly! ;) Is anyone using GroundWork Foundation ( > http://www.groundworkopensource.com/products ) with Nagios? Any > thoughts on the company or their product would be appreciated. Not familiar with the Foundation stuff, no. -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ 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
Re: [Nagios-users] Packet loss reported by check_ping?
I agree it sounds logical that check_ping uses one packet, then however many you have set after that. So thanks to everyone who pointed that out! If I can get things straight so it doesn't do so many host checks, I'll probably revert back to the default number of ping packets. (Or maybe go for 4 instead, to actually get my 20-40-60-80% results) >> Also, along those lines... I recently moved from the 1.2 Nagios to the >> more recent 2.4-2.5 Nagios. Nagios 1.X seemed to only trigger a host >> check if a service check failed. Nagios 2.X seems to ALWAYS run host >> checks in addition to service checks. The fact that host checks are >> currently not run in parallel seems like this can really limit performance. >> >> Why did that behavior change? > > It didn't. Or rather, it wasn't supposed to. I haven't seen anything of > the kind in any of our ~160 customers installations, so I'm fairly > certain this doesn't happen for all setups. What does your nagios.log > report on the ~15 lines prepending the host-check entry? I should add that I'm using Monarch from the GrounworkOpensource.com guys. I'm using their latest open source version, which I believe is 4.5.11 or something like that. It came with, um, some version of Nagios that I can't immediately identify. Possibly as old as 2.0. (How can I confirm the current version of Nagios?) I've thought about upgrading the Nagios that comes with Monarch. I've seen posts in their forums on how to do that, although they say it is unsupported. Monarch imported our existing Nagios 1.X configuration, but it looks like this was one of a few mistakes it made. I see it is indeed now set to have a check_interval for each host, as well as for each service. (Not like it used to be!) I'll go update the Monarch config; sounds like that'll take care of that part. I assume I just remove the value from the host's check_interval completely? Here are the last few lines from nagios.log: [1166030882] SERVICE ALERT: Authentication1;PING;OK;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 25.15 ms [1166030891] SERVICE ALERT: whi-whwt;SNMP2;UNKNOWN;SOFT;2;SNMP problem - No data received from host [1166030901] SERVICE ALERT: 2river-210west;PING;OK;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 40.62 ms [1166030901] SERVICE ALERT: plum-rokap02;PING;CRITICAL;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 19.04 ms [1166030901] SERVICE ALERT: les-termap01;PING;CRITICAL;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 25.81 ms [1166030911] HOST ALERT: 2river-ap01;DOWN;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 24.82 ms [1166030913] HOST ALERT: 2river-ap01;DOWN;SOFT;2;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 25.33 ms [1166030913] HOST ALERT: 2river-ap01;UP;SOFT;3;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 12.41 ms [1166030937] HOST ALERT: crn-ap04;DOWN;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 15.69 ms [1166030937] HOST ALERT: crn-ap04;UP;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 17.17 ms [1166030940] HOST ALERT: doug-pwr;DOWN;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 23.90 ms [1166030940] HOST ALERT: doug-pwr;UP;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 17.42 ms [1166030982] HOST ALERT: plat-ap01;DOWN;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 12.12 ms [1166030982] HOST ALERT: plat-ap01;UP;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 11.75 ms [1166031011] SERVICE ALERT: whi-whwt;SNMP2;UNKNOWN;HARD;3;SNMP problem - No data received from host [1166031021] SERVICE ALERT: wmn-ap01;PING;CRITICAL;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 7.19 ms [1166031021] SERVICE ALERT: plum-rokap02;PING;OK;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 53.29 ms [1166031021] SERVICE ALERT: les-termap01;PING;OK;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 62.16 ms [1166031027] HOST ALERT: wmn-ap01;DOWN;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 8.95 ms [1166031027] HOST ALERT: wmn-ap01;UP;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 9.09 ms [1166031139] HOST ALERT: 2river-210west;DOWN;SOFT;1;PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 50%, RTA = 28.75 ms [1166031139] HOST ALERT: 2river-210west;UP;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 15.85 ms [1166031141] SERVICE ALERT: wmn-ap01;PING;OK;SOFT;2;PING OK - Packet loss = 0%, RTA = 9.76 ms Thanks again for everybody's input!! ;) (Have I mentioned that I love Nagios? I've used it *forever* -- remember NetSaint? -- and it's pretty hard to beat!) -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&am
[Nagios-users] Packet loss reported by check_ping?
Good morning, all. I've been tweaking our Nagios install over the years. I've often wondered exactly how the check_ping plugin reports its results. I used to leave this plugin at the default number of packets, which I believe is five. If and when we saw warnings on packet loss, it would usually give us numbers like 16%, 32%, or multiples like that. Why not multiples of 20%, given that it tried five packets? Now I'm worried, though. I recently changed our default ping commands to only use ONE ping packet. This was due to advice I found after a Google search, when I was seeing extremely high latencies on my host (and some service) checks. It certainly seemed to help, too, now my host latency is usually below one second. (Instead of the FIFTEEN MINUTES it was reporting before that) But I still see some reports of packet loss. Like, 50% is a common number I now see. HOW is it seeing anything but either 0% or 100% packet loss, if it uses only one packet per host check?? Also, along those lines... I recently moved from the 1.2 Nagios to the more recent 2.4-2.5 Nagios. Nagios 1.X seemed to only trigger a host check if a service check failed. Nagios 2.X seems to ALWAYS run host checks in addition to service checks. The fact that host checks are currently not run in parallel seems like this can really limit performance. Why did that behavior change? Will host checks be run in parallel for the 3.0 series, like I think I read once...? Thanks for any input! -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ 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
Re: [Nagios-users] Nagios 2.0b4 & Firefox 1.5 Possible Memory Leak
Yep. But, I have also seen this problem since Firefox 1.0. I am fortunate enough to have a bunch of RAM, so it is little more than a nuisance for me. :) There are known memory hogging issues with Firefox. They have been there quite awhile, and the developers debate endlessly about fixing them. The longer you keep Firefox running, and the more tabs you use, the more RAM it can use up. It also has an odd problem with swapping, but I won't go into details here. (If Firefox or Thunderbird swap out of memory, either by being minimized long enough, or just by running enough other data through memory, they take FOREVER to swap back in again. Much slower than launching the program to begin with. Another long-time lingering bug) -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click ___ 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
Re: [Nagios-users] snmp not working
HP Geeza wrote: ./check_snmp 10.30.129.30 -o .1.3.6.1.4.1.2012.1.1.1.4.2.0 -C public -wv 80 -cv 85 Verify your check_snmp syntax. That plugin requires a "-H" before your host IP address. -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today Register for a JBoss Training Course. Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit: http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click ___ 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
Re: [Nagios-users] NRPE + raidutil ?
chmod 755 `which raidutil` as root? It was indeed the SUID bit that was necessary. It looked like that's what the web page (in Czech) I found was saying. But, y'know, I don't speak a word of Czech. To summarize, the solution was: (Add Dag Wieers' Yum repository) % yum install nagios-nrpe % useradd nagios % groupadd nagios (Download and install raidutils RPM from http://i2o.shadowconnect.com/) % chown root:nagios /usr/bin/raid* % chmod 750 /usr/bin/raid* % chmod u+s /usr/bin/raidutil I've also found that raidutil often takes too long to run to be useful for NRPE. So I have a cron job that runs raidutil and saves the output to a text file, then have NRPE just check the contents of that file. Seems to respond in less than a second, for me. Thanks again for everyone's help! -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php ___ 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
[Nagios-users] NRPE + raidutil ?
Good afternoon, all. I'm trying to monitor RAID array status using NRPE. But I'm running into minor security issues. * Adaptec 2100S RAID controller * CentOS 4.2 * raidutil RPM from http://i2o.shadowconnect.com When logged directly into the system to monitor, the raidutil command only works if I am root. But NRPE refuses to start if I tell it to use root as user and group. (Running under xinetd, in this case) Can anyone tell me the best (most secure) way to get this working properly? This web page seems to talk about it, but in Czech... http://homel.vsb.cz/~jas02/raid/ I am using an apparently custom Nagios plugin called "check_dpt_raid" and again, it seems to run manually just fine as long as I am root. (Can't remember where I got the plugin -- maybe from someone's mention of it on the mailing list. Nothing comes up when I search for the name!) Thanks as always! -- Jason Byrns Production Manager System Administrator http://www.MicroLnk.com/ 402-328-8600 ext. 653 --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php ___ 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
