On 11/24/2010 11:34 AM, Fredrik Thulin wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-24 at 10:23 +0100, Jochen Bern wrote:
>> In evaluating a new check
>> scheduler, the first thing I'd be interested in would be its
>> *correctness*, from the detail (single host/service) up to the global
>> level (yielding a rate of X/min, not less, nor more - hence my confusi=
on
>> about your "the more checks per minute, the better!" stance).
> Right. What level of correctness are you talking about here?
Just to make a neat French bowline into this loose end: As I mentioned,
I consider a scheduler's capability to avoid workload peaks (or, at
least, prevent their recurrence every check_interval) by "wiggling" the
check execution times by a certain amount a "quality", and have hacked a
certain amount of randomization into this myself.
A larger net outage in a world of retry_interval
Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt | Robert-Koch-Str. 9, 64331 Weiterstadt
PGP (1024D/4096g) FP =3D D18B 41B1 16C0 11BA 7F8C DCF7 E1D5 FAF4 444E 1C2=
7
Tel. +49 6151 9067-231, Zentr. -0, Fax -299 - Amtsg. Darmstadt HRB 85202
Unternehmenssitz Weiterstadt, Gesch=E4ftsf=FChrer Metin Dogan, Oliver Mic=
hel
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]