> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nagios-users-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 9:38 AM
> To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Nagios-users] Nagios monitoring limits: hosts and services
> 
> I'm starting to get complaints from our Operations group that the
Nagios
> web GUI is "getting slow".  This is on a version 1.x Nagios server.
The
> server is monitoring 678 hosts and 3481 services organized in 29 host
> groups.  Most checks are done on 5 minutes intervals.  I've gone over
> all of the documented "tweaks" to improve performance.  The hardware
> seems adequate and isn't starved for CPU; loads seem reasonable;
> although the "Check Latency" under the "Performance Info" screen
> continually creeps up - currently at Max. 23 seconds.
> 
> Time to load the "Status Overview" screen: 8,5,6,6 seconds
> Time to load the "Status Summary" screen: 42,35
> 
> I guess my first question is what do your uses expect in terms of
> performance?

This is not unusual for a 1.x installation with large numbers of
hosts/services. I had hostgroup overview pages that were taking up to 5
minutes to generate and I needed to cron them. There were significant
optimizations done in 2.x to correct the way the CGI's internally
traversed host and service entries resulting in the same pages
generating in about 6 _seconds_.

You should upgrade. 1.x is getting very old now.

--
Marc

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to