Re: [Nagios-users] check_load -w $ARG1$ -c $ARG2$

Load average is a relative measure of how much work over time a system is doing. Read these to start: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9001 http://www.teamquest.com/pdfs/whitepaper/ldavg1.pdf http://www.teamquest.com/pdfs/whitepaper/ldavg2.pdf -

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load -w $ARG1$ -c $ARG2$

These are the warning and the critical thresholds, when the load ( 1min, 5min, 15min ) value rises above the threshold you set it triggers the warning or error message in the script. So in the example you give it would mean, if the 1min average goes above 5, it will trigger a warning event, if

Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load

dif -- Cheers, Jamie From: Liz Cardona [mailto:lcard...@buzz-media.com] Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 1:54 PM To: Nagios Users List Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load Hello, I am wondering if someone had an idea regarding the quest

Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load

Hello, I am wondering if someone had an idea regarding the question below? Thanks, On 1/5/11 10:07 AM, "Liz Cardona" wrote: Hello, Ive been using nagios for quite sometime now and would like to enhance the way I do check_load. According to you documentation, when using the plugin check_load

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load gone crazy

On 09/08/2010 09:10 PM, Dorfman, Justin wrote: > You are welcome. Glad to be of help. > Just for the record, it was actually Marc's answer that was correct. I wouldn't want anyone finding this in the archives and believe that this is a symptom of flapping. But thanks for playing anyways. -- An

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load gone crazy

You are welcome. Glad to be of help. Regards, Justin Dorfman 818.485.1458 Sent from my Droid On Sep 8, 2010 12:07 PM, "Mike Chesnut" wrote: > What transport mechanism are you using to run check_load on the remote systems? It is not 'network... Wow, good catch. With the standard disclaimers a

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load gone crazy

> What transport mechanism are you using to run check_load on the remote > systems? It is not 'network aware' and so the check_load binary must be > installed on each remote machine and run on that machine via some transport > (check_nrpe, check_by_ssh, etc). It seems to me that you are not runn

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load gone crazy

I believe you are running into a flapping issue. Read this: http://nagios.sourceforge.net/docs/2_0/flapping.html Regards, Justin Dorfman Mahalo.com Inc. > Jr. Systems Engineer 818.485.1458 @jdorfman | @Mahal

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load gone crazy

On Sep 7, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Mike Chesnut wrote: > I'm wondering if this is a known bug, and/or if anybody else has seen > similar behavior... > > We're using Nagios 3.2.1 on Linux, monitoring several Linux systems. We > run the check_load probe against every system. Occasionally (at > non-r

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

y, October 16, 2008 3:09 PM > To: Aaron Segura > Cc: Nagios > Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] check_load issue > > I found this.. > > File: /etc/nagios-plugins/config/load.cfg > > > # 'check_load' command definition > define command{ > command_

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:57 PM > To: Aaron Segura > Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] check_load issue > > Aaron, > > Thanks for your response. Here's the message I sent to the list. > > > Date: > Thu, 16 Oct 2

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

mmand definitions and macro usage. -Original Message- From: jeremiah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 3:09 PM To: Aaron Segura Cc: Nagios Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] check_load issue I found this.. File: /etc/nagios-plugins/config/load.cfg # 'check_loa

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

Hi jeremiah! On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, jeremiah wrote: > I checked my commands.cfg file and noticed the command wasn't defined so > I went and put this in there... > > define command { > command_namecheck_load > command_linelibexec/check_load -w $ARG1$ $ARG2$ $ARG3 -c > $ARG4

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

From: jeremiah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:57 PM To: Aaron Segura Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] check_load issue Aaron, Thanks for your response. Here's the message I sent to the list. Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:49:17 -0700 I

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

I checked my commands.cfg file and noticed the command wasn't defined so I went and put this in there... define command { command_namecheck_load command_linelibexec/check_load -w $ARG1$ $ARG2$ $ARG3 -c $ARG4$ $ARG5$ $ARG6$ } However, when i restarted nagios it told me the

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

On Oct 16, 2008, at 3:32 PM, jeremiah wrote: > My check_load service keeps on giving me the following error. > > "Warning threshold must be float or float triplet! " > > However, when i run the command from the system it works just fine. > > ./check_load -w 10.0,8.0,5.0 -c 15.0,10.0,8.0 > OK - lo

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

Going to at least need to see the command definition. -Original Message- From: jeremiah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:33 PM To: Nagios Subject: [Nagios-users] check_load issue My check_load service keeps on giving me the following error. "Warning threshold

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load issue

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, jeremiah wrote: > My check_load service keeps on giving me the following error. > > "Warning threshold must be float or float triplet! " > > However, when i run the command from the system it works just fine. > > ./check_load -w 10.0,8.0,5.0 -c 15.0,10.0,8.0 > OK - load ave

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Terry wrote: | I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load | average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' | command on a box does not do this. So, if I have an 8 core box | sitting with a load average of 8

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/05/08 10:14 AM, Mike Emigh wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 09:31:07AM -0400, Mike Emigh wrote: >>> You're right, it wouldn't work with just a single-threaded process.

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/05/08 08:36 AM, Ugo Bellavance wrote: > Terry a écrit : >> I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load >> average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' >> command on a box does not do this. So, if I h

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 09:31:07AM -0400, Mike Emigh wrote: >> You're right, it wouldn't work with just a single-threaded process. >> I'm not sure of the specifics of how this would happen, but with >> Oracle we've seen it

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 09:31:07AM -0400, Mike Emigh wrote: > You're right, it wouldn't work with just a single-threaded process. > I'm not sure of the specifics of how this would happen, but with > Oracle we've seen it maxing two CPUs and raising the load to 56 while > the 6 other cores in the 8 c

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Mike Emigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:48 AM, Thomas Guyot-Sionnest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> On 08/05/08 10:31 AM, Mike Emigh wrote: >>> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Terry <[E

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:48 AM, Thomas Guyot-Sionnest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 08/05/08 10:31 AM, Mike Emigh wrote: >> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

Terry a écrit : > I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load > average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' > command on a box does not do this. So, if I have an 8 core box > sitting with a load average of 8, its the same as a single core box > sittin

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/05/08 10:31 AM, Mike Emigh wrote: > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load >> average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' >> c

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is the logic I was looking for. This makes sense. Apache with > prefork is not multithreaded and this type of logic is great. But do > you shoot yourself in the foot for multithreaded processes? > What we do in our setup is

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

This is the logic I was looking for. This makes sense. Apache with prefork is not multithreaded and this type of logic is great. But do you shoot yourself in the foot for multithreaded processes? On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Mike Emigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:4

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On May 8, 2008, at 6:49 AM, Terry wrote: > I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load > average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' > command on a box does not do this. So, if I have an 8 core box > sitting with a load average of 8, its the same as

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load > average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' > command on a box does not do this. So, if I have an 8 core box > sitting with a load average

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load --- divide by number of cpus?

On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 08:49:52AM -0500, Terry wrote: > I am sitting here racking my brain on this one. Is dividing the load > average by the number of CPUs a smart thing to do? the 'uptime' > command on a box does not do this. So, if I have an 8 core box > sitting with a load average of 8, its

Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load

> > The reason behind my question is that we are also using CACTI for =20 > > monitoring the systems and it shows a 100% CPU load since last =20 > > night while Nagios didn=92t raise any alarm at all. I have to find =20 > > out whether it was a false alarm or there is a problem with my =20 > > Nagi

Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load

t; > Regards, > > sg > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tiernan, > Michael C. > Sent: quarta-feira, 10 de Maio de 2006 14:43 > To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load

RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load

> -Original Message- > From: Sandeep Narasimha Murthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 11:26 AM > To: Tiernan, Michael C.; nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load [...] > So, does load average: 0.35, 0.47, 0.

RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load

Sandeep Narasimha Murthy wrote: > > So, does load average: 0.35, 0.47, 0.53, mean there are only 0.53 > jobs running and waiting over the last 15 minutes ? executing TOP in > the shell shows me at least 15 different processes.. The important distinction here is "running", i.e. actually on the C

RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load

2006 14:43 To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load On Behalf Of Derek J. Balling Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:52 AM To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load > "load average" is

Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load

On May 10, 2006, at 10:07 AM, Sandeep Narasimha Murthy wrote:1.The server in question has 2 CPUs. When Nagios invokes check_load, does it monitor both the CPUs and reports the combined load average ?There is only one load average. Load Average is the number of processes in the wait state. They migh

RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load

OK thresholds for Load Average ? I mean when does it launch a Critical state ?   Thnx again,   Sg   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek J. Balling Sent: quarta-feira, 10 de Maio de 2006 11:52 To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Nagios

RE: [Nagios-users] Check_load

On Behalf Of Derek J. Balling Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:52 AM To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load > "load average" is the number of processes (average) in the > wait state over a given period of time. Ac

Re: [Nagios-users] Check_load

On May 10, 2006, at 6:42 AM, Sandeep Narasimha Murthy wrote:Can anyone please provide a brief idea on how check_load works and on the data it provides. The data provided is in the format load average: 1.62, 1.67, 1.74, which doesn’t make a lot of sense. I googled on this and ended up getting even m

Re: [Nagios-users] check_load is good?

Hi Marc, Thanks! 2006/3/31, Marc Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Yep, you're right on. The OP would need to use something like -- > > check_procs -m CPU -w 80 -c 90 > > That would warn if any process exceeded 80% cpu and show critical if it > exceeded 90%. > > -- > Marc >

RE: [Nagios-users] check_load is good?

PROTECTED] On Behalf Of InnovationsTech, Matthew Thomas > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 3:54 AM > To: Sim; Nagios Users Mailing List > Subject: RE: [Nagios-users] check_load is good? > > This is only checking the load of the box. You have it set to alert when > the load gets to 15 or

RE: [Nagios-users] check_load is good?

This is only checking the load of the box. You have it set to alert when the load gets to 15 or 5 or such. Your load is circa 1.. You would have to use ./check_proc or something of another Am I following correctly? Regards, Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL