In my experience, there are weird things that happen with timing. That is, the time on a VM should be sync'd with a time source so no time is lost. However, the VM has what I like to think of as "seconds of variable length".
So when we tested with a VM a few years ago, the latency and execution timings and calculations were really screwy. There were checks that Nagios thought ran in "-0.15" seconds, for example. Considering that this was information that we cared about, we chose to stick with a physical box. And yes, I/O is now an increasing concern for us so a VM would be even less likely. That said, I know another team who has much lighter requirements (they just want alerts, don't care about latencies (yet)) and they've been on a VM for years now with Nagios. Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Nagios-users mailing list [email protected] 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
