On 1/19/08, Jan-Henrik Haukeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ok, thanks for the report, we'll look into it. That is, Martin will look
> into it when he comes back from the US, I hope. For my part m/monit has
> priority one right now. I'm in the flow :)
>

Thank you Jan-Henrik, for flowing with the go and going with the flow ;-)

I hope Martin is having a nice time in the U.S.

-Serg



On 19. jan.. 2008, at 21.06, Sergio Trejo wrote:
>
> This is an update to my previous message posted herein. The version 4.10.1of 
> monit most definitely has a bug in it and its not related to Mac OS X
> 10.5 because version 4.9 of monit runs just perfectly on Mac OS X 10.5.
>
> The bug is that monit 4.10.1 does not send out multiple email messages
> when, very cycle, it encounters multiple daemons not running (whether the
> daemons have crashed or have been torn down intentionally by a sys admin).
>
> Regards,
>
> Sergio
>
> On 1/19/08, Sergio Trejo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have monit (version 4.10.1) running on an Apple machine which is Mac
> > OS X Server (Leopard, 10.5.1). My installation of monit monitors six
> > separate daemons for these programs: Apache, Postfix, PostgreSQL, Tomcat,
> > OpenLDAP, and MySQL. My monit configuration file has entries that look like
> > this for all of the six aforementioned programs (taking Apache for example):
> >
> >
> > check process apache with pidfile "/opt/local/apache2/logs/httpd.pid"
> > > every 10 cycles
> > >     start = "/opt/local/apache2/bin/apachectl start"
> > >     stop = "/opt/local/apache2/bin/apachectl stop"
> > >     if failed port 80 and protocol http then restart
> > >     if 5 restarts within 5 cycles then timeout
> > >
> >
> > Where my daemon frequency is set to 60 seconds as in:
> >
> > set daemon 60
> > >
> >
> > What is interesting is that I had all six of my daemons running as a
> > starting point and monit confirmed this (using the little http server built
> > into monit on port 2812). I then, very intentionally (as sort of an
> > auditing process) killed five out of my six daemons (the only daemon I left
> > running was the Postfix daemon because I still wanted to have monit be
> > capable of sending email alerts since I use the internal mail server running
> > on the same machine as Postfix, as in "set mailserver 127.0.0.1"). So,
> > with five of the six daemons intentionally killed, monit did successfully
> > later catch up and successfully re-started all five daemons. However, monit
> > only generated two mail message alerts:1
> >
> > 1. A message stating that the apache daemon did not exist
> >
> > 2. A message stating that the postgres daemon did exist (seemed to have
> > sent this message after re-starting PostgreSQL)
> >
> > But, why didn't I receive ten messages, five of them for each daemon
> > that I intentionally killed stating that they did not exist, and then later
> > on five more messages stating that the five daemons (after being restarted)
> > did indeed exist again?
> >
> > Also, why did I get the first message for apache saying it didn't exist
> > whereas the second message, should it also have stated that the apache
> > daemon existed again (instead of telling me that the postgres daemon
> > existed)?
> >
> > It doesn't make sense. Is it possible that monit was "overwhelmed" or
> > overloaded in some way and became "confused"? I know that doesn't sound
> > appropriate for a binary system but there is nothing in the monit log file
> > to give me any hints. Perhaps, did monit experience a race condition?
> >
> > The log file shows that all five daemons which I had manually killed
> > were restarted successfully (and indeed they were -- I ssh'ed into my server
> > and saw them all running again as processes and monit also reported their
> > successful running again on its http server on port 2812).
> >
> > If this was a race condition, could there be an issue with threading?
> > Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard and Leopard Server) might be different enough
> > compared to previous versions of Mac OS X with regard to a change to how
> > threading works (but I am writing this very vaguely without much information
> > at the moment other than some fuzzy recollection that something related to
> > threading on Leopard might have changed).
> >
> > Thanks for any suggestions,
> >
> > Serg
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe:
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-general
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe:
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-general
>
--
To unsubscribe:
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-general

Reply via email to