Re: [Nagios-devel] Nagios 2.6 still not draining command pipe fast
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:46 am
John P. Rouillard wrote:
> In message ,
> Ethan Galstad writes:
>
>> John P. Rouillard wrote:
>>> Hi all:
>>>
>>> I am trying to get my external correlation engine working with nagios
>>> 2.x , and I just can't get
>>> nagios to drain the command pipe fast enough. I see approx. 5% failure
>>> rate on writing to the command pipe with an EAGAIN error.
>>>
>>> I have increased:
>>>
>>> nagios.h:#define COMMAND_BUFFER_SLOTS 20480
>>> nagios.h:#define SERVICE_BUFFER_SLOTS 20480
>>>
>>> from the original 1024. In the increase of the settings from 10240 to
>>> 20480, I may see a slight decrease (maybe .5%), but I think I just want to
>>> see it. I don't think it's statistically viable.
>> John - Does this problem still occur with Nagios 2.7 or the latest 2.x
>> CVS code? A separate command file worker thread should be reading
>> entries from the external command file as fast as it can read them (as
>> long as their are free buffer slots).
>
> I don't know. 2.6 was the latest when I started this. I will build it
> later this week and report back.
>
>> If there aren't any external commands, the thread waits 0.5 seconds
>> before checking for new commands in the file. If you have occasional
>> bursts of check results, this could be too long to wait. You could try
>> experimenting with decreasing the 0.5 second delay. Around line 4948 of
>> base/utils.c, you'll find...
>>
>> /* wait a bit */
>> tv.tv_sec=0;
>> tv.tv_usec=500000;
>> select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&tv);
>>
>> You could try decreasing the value of tv.tv_usec to 100000 (0.1 seconds)
>> and see if that helps at all.
>
> Cool. Thanks. Maybe this is also a tuning parameter that could/should
> be exposed in the configuation files?
Possibly, but users are probably already suffering from config variable
overload.
If changing the value helps with your situation, I
suppose something different would be in order though.
>
> If I get my external correlation patch working, would you consider
> including the patch in the nagios core?
>
> -- rouilj
> John Rouillard
Sounds interesting. If you send a patch, I'll consider it for inclusion
in Nagios 3, although I won't want patches that changes too many things
once 3 goes into beta.
Ethan Galstad,
Nagios Developer
---
Email: [email protected]
Website: http://www.nagios.org
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]
> In message ,
> Ethan Galstad writes:
>
>> John P. Rouillard wrote:
>>> Hi all:
>>>
>>> I am trying to get my external correlation engine working with nagios
>>> 2.x , and I just can't get
>>> nagios to drain the command pipe fast enough. I see approx. 5% failure
>>> rate on writing to the command pipe with an EAGAIN error.
>>>
>>> I have increased:
>>>
>>> nagios.h:#define COMMAND_BUFFER_SLOTS 20480
>>> nagios.h:#define SERVICE_BUFFER_SLOTS 20480
>>>
>>> from the original 1024. In the increase of the settings from 10240 to
>>> 20480, I may see a slight decrease (maybe .5%), but I think I just want to
>>> see it. I don't think it's statistically viable.
>> John - Does this problem still occur with Nagios 2.7 or the latest 2.x
>> CVS code? A separate command file worker thread should be reading
>> entries from the external command file as fast as it can read them (as
>> long as their are free buffer slots).
>
> I don't know. 2.6 was the latest when I started this. I will build it
> later this week and report back.
>
>> If there aren't any external commands, the thread waits 0.5 seconds
>> before checking for new commands in the file. If you have occasional
>> bursts of check results, this could be too long to wait. You could try
>> experimenting with decreasing the 0.5 second delay. Around line 4948 of
>> base/utils.c, you'll find...
>>
>> /* wait a bit */
>> tv.tv_sec=0;
>> tv.tv_usec=500000;
>> select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&tv);
>>
>> You could try decreasing the value of tv.tv_usec to 100000 (0.1 seconds)
>> and see if that helps at all.
>
> Cool. Thanks. Maybe this is also a tuning parameter that could/should
> be exposed in the configuation files?
Possibly, but users are probably already suffering from config variable
overload.
If changing the value helps with your situation, Isuppose something different would be in order though.
>
> If I get my external correlation patch working, would you consider
> including the patch in the nagios core?
>
> -- rouilj
> John Rouillard
Sounds interesting. If you send a patch, I'll consider it for inclusion
in Nagios 3, although I won't want patches that changes too many things
once 3 goes into beta.
Ethan Galstad,
Nagios Developer
---
Email: [email protected]
Website: http://www.nagios.org
This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]