On 13/11/06, Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure I see the benefits of tweaking the MIB and the code to > replace "virtual memory" by "real+swap" for these objects.
The changes to the MIB are intended to make the behaviour more explicit - thus avoiding the potential ambiguities that have bedevilled these objects in the past. > What's wrong with using "virtual memory" for these objects? I don't want to do this because in most cases, the HAL memory entry that's labelled as VIRTMEM does *not* actually monitor virtual memory. In pracise, it's tended to be implemented as real+swap - which may or may not be the same thing. I would prefer to have this made explicit in the code, at the point where it's actually used - rather than relying on implicit assumptions in another area. This also leaves the possibility open for having the HAL memory module report virtual memory statistics properly - perhaps for use in other MIB modules. I don't want to hamstring the HAL code, simply to cope with backward compatibility problems with the UCD memory statistics. Dave [Now to see whether this reply actually makes it onto the list!] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
