Re: [Nagios-devel] Possible bug in Nagios 2.12?

[Guest]

________________________________________
>From: Andreas Ericsson [[email protected]]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 4:21 PM
>To: Nagios Developers List
>Subject: Re: [Nagios-devel] Possible bug in Nagios 2.12?

Steven D. Morrey wrote:
> >Thats a good point, so the better thing might be to move that check to t=
he end of the event_list and move the even_list right along.
> >I have some experimental code I'm working with.
> >If you put it in above the place where it goes to sleep, it should unblo=
ck the queue and let the other checks run.
>

>That's a bad idea, as it would mean checks that can't be
>parallelized are likely to *never* run.


I'm not so sure thats a bad thing, at least not in our case.
Say we have 28,000 service checks that need to run, MOST of which can run i=
n parallel, but there are maybe 100 that can't.
Wouldn't it be better to have those checks be pushed to the back of the que=
ue, or even just moved up to the high priority queue, rather than causing a=
minimum of 100 seconds of check latency, and holding up the works for the =
rest of the 28,000 checks that still need to run?
Just a thought.

Sincerely,
Steven Morrey


NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s=
) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized=
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the =
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy al=
l copies of the original message.







This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]