> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nagios-users- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tobias Klausmann > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 8:44 AM > To: nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] timeouts and performance info > > Hi! > > On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Marc Powell wrote: > > > Active Service Checks: > > > <= 1 minute: 81 (4.6%) > > > <= 5 minutes: 1719 (97.4%) > > > <= 15 minutes: 1727 (97.9%) > > > <= 1 hour: 1727 (97.9%) > > > Since program start: 1727 (97.9%) > >
> I have a few services that are disabled entirely (don't check > actively, don't accept passive checks). Would they count in the > above statistic? They seem to fit in with the missing 2.1% > (100-97.9). Also, I saw a few checks that were last run about ~20 Without reviewing the code, that is what I expect to be the case. > > > > Check Latency is that number. On average nagios is able to run your > > checks within 3.043 seconds of when they are scheduled to run. The > > number you are referring to is just a simple count of the number of > > plugins that have been run in that time interval. > > So it means "in the last N minutes, this many services completed" > and *not* "this many services needed N minutes to complete (from > being started to delivering the retval)"? That would be an eye > opener for me :) That is a correct interpretation. -- Marc ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ 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
