|
You may, if your organization/comfort level allows it,
want to upgrade to the latest "beta". There have been a number of
performance improvements in the interim releases. Don't let the beta tag
fool you, the releases are stable and reliable.
Do you have a lot of down checks each cycle or do you
create a number of HTML reports? Both can cause significant increases in
the total cycle time. The default timeout on a check is 5 seconds.
On a LAN this is long than needed IMO and for things like a ping check can be
reduced to 1 second. On a WAN or other types of checks trail and error
will help determine what the timeout could be.
-Kevin From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Clough, Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 4:16 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [SA-list] Server's Alive slowness I forgot the Server’s
Alive specifics. It is running From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Stone Which version are you
running(5.x.xxxx), how many checks, and what are the server specs(CPU and
RAM). That setting has been the most dramatic decrease in cycle times for
my installations. -Kevin From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of I recently migrated Server’s Alive
to a newer faster server with more memory and upgraded from version 4 to version
5. However, it is taking significantly more time to complete the check cycle
that it did on the old system. I changed the registry value
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\DBU Consulting\Servers Alive\StartUp\PerItemCycle
from 250 to 10 and rebooted the server, but there has been no effect on the
length of the check cycle. Is there something else that needs
to be set to increase performance? Bruce
Clough Bechtel |
- RE: [SA-list] Server's Alive slowness Kevin Stone
- Re: [SA-list] Server's Alive slowness Brett Hanson
- RE: [SA-list] Server's Alive slowness Dirk Bulinckx
- RE: [SA-list] Server's Alive slowness Brett Hanson
