Splitting the app to just send or just receive is easy. BUT this would mean that Servers Alive would have to know that on cycle a it must do app with parameter set_1 and on cycle a+1 with parameter set_2 And that IF it already has a problem within set_1 (like the SMTP server not responding) that even in interation a+1 that it should go back to using set_1 and not set_2.
One option might be to rewrite SMTP2POP3 as an external COM check were the check as such is smart enough to change it's parameter set to say what has to be done the next time. But this would also have as effect that an UP doesn't mean that the mailflow is working now, but it means that OR the mailsending is working now OR the mailreceiving is working now. Also some of the flexibility of SMTP2POP3 goes away by splitting it. The way it works now is that within the given timeout SMTP2POP3 will check (if needed) several times the POP3 mailbox to see if the mail has already arrived and if after the full timeout nothing arrived (or at least nothing with the correct subject), then you get a down. By splitting it you would assume that between cycle a and cycle a+1 the mail had time enough to arrive in the mailbox. So if you're using a small hostfile and using a small interval between cycles this could give problems. Still something to think about.... dirk. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Kruithof Sent: Tue Oct 21 9:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive Would it be helpful to split the SMTP send and the POP receive portions of the SMTP2POP3 program up? You could then send the message on one iteration, and receive it on the next. One nice side affect of this is that you could use MAPISend to send something through the Exchange MAPI interface and check it with the POP3 side of the program. Dirk, would it be easy to split the program up? Kevin Kevin Kruithof Class 3 Systems Administrator, Section 21b, Type 42, Platinum Edition Center for Useless Classification Expert Tech Group 916-677-1032 -----Original Message----- From: Jack Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 11:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive I am not sure about the specific checks this person is doing, but have a 5 different mail servers that I want to verify mail is flowing through. Some of the time outs are as long as 3 minutes (over a WAN link) but each check adds to the entire cycle. Is there a way to have the check happen, but not to wait the 3 minutes before going to the next check? I know a multi-threaded app could do it, but it doesn't look like SA is going to be rewritten any time soon. Is there any one else who has found a work around. Jack > -----Original Message----- > From: Dirk Bulinckx [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 2:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive > > Ofcourse you can run multiple copies on multiple machines IF you have > licenses for it. We added a field to all db loggings that identifies > the host that added > the entry, so I would say yes. > > > > dirk. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Michael Shook > Sent: Tue Oct 21 8:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive > > > But you can however have multiple copies running on multiple machines > right? Will the databases correctly merge data from multiple sources? > > > > Michael Shook > Business Continuity Analyst > Saddle Creek Corporation > 723 Joe Tamplin Industrial Blvd > Macon GA 31217 > 478 742 8740 ext. 105 (work) > 478 256 9318 (mobile) > 478 742 7917 (fax) > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.saddlecrk.com > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/21/03 01:30PM >>> > And having a different registry for each too? Let's call Bill (Gates) > and ask to get several registries.... > > > > > > dirk. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Greg A Weigold > Sent: Tue Oct 21 7:18 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive > > > > I can understand the difficulties in multi-threaded approach, but what > about being able to run multiple iterations of SA using different logs > and such... > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------------- > This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please > delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in > delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to > bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit > written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use > of e-mail for such purpose. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------------- > > > > > "Dirk Bulinckx" <dirk > @woodstone.nu> > Sent by: salive-owner > > > 10/21/2003 10:38 > Please respond to salive > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for > servers alive > > > > Comment as author: I know > > > dirk. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Greg D. Moore > Sent: Tue Oct 21 4:32 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive > > > At 11:45 AM 10/21/2003 +0200, you wrote: > > >Simple answer: no > > > >This would be a 100% rewrite of Servers Alive in order to do this. And > >that's NOT something we're planning. > > > I can fully understand the reasoning behind this. However as a > customer, let me submit another "this would be helpful' comment. :-) > > > > > > >dirk. > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > >Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Tue Oct 21 11:42 AM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: [SA-list] Wish List - Multiple threads for servers alive > > > > > >Dirk, > > > >I currently have 505 out of 1000 checks running on servers alive, a > >check cycle takes approx 10-15 mins to run with a 5 min delay between > >checks. > > > >As such it can be upto 30-35 mins before we see a service as being > >down. > > > >I have managed to shorten the check cycle by making some of the less > >critical checks check every 3 cycles etc. > > > >Can servers alive be made to be multiple threaded eg:- rather than > >running all checks in a single series, it has say half a dozen series > >check paths and each check 'grabs' its next check in the cycle. So in > >essence you would have 6 checks running at a single point in time? > > > >This would reduce the check cycle in principle to 5 mins. > > > >Regards > > > >Paul > >_______________________________________________________________________ > >_ > >______________________________________ > > > >The affairs, business and property of T&N Ltd are being managed by the > >Joint Administrators, S Freakley, J Gleave, and G Squires. T&N Ltd is a > > >debtor under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code. > > > > > >To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] With the following in the body of the message: > > unsubscribe SAlive > > > > > > > >To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] With the following in the body of the message: > > unsubscribe SAlive > > Greg D. Moore Director of IT [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Powerone Media 1-800-6POWER6 > Security Tip: Have you run Windows Update Lately? > > To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > With the following in the body of the message: > unsubscribe SAlive > > > > To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > With the following in the body of the message: > unsubscribe SAlive > > > > > To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > With the following in the body of the message: > unsubscribe SAlive > > > > To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > With the following in the body of the message: > unsubscribe SAlive This email and its contents may be confidential. If it is and you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe SAlive To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe SAlive To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe SAlive
