Thanks Jim, I will contact Dirk and see if he can help me identify the good one and I'll make sure it's what is installed.
-Rob > We had trouble when we converted from version 4 to version 5. We found > that there was a pretty severe handle leak in the perfdata OCX. Our > system would lock up after a few hours of operation. We had a lot of > perfmon checks. > > I worked with Woodstone and we now have a fairly stable version. You > may want to check into that. > > Jim Ferrell > EDS - Allison Transmission > 4700 W 10th St > Mail Code 462-470-H04 > Indianapolis, IN 46222 > > * phone: +01-317-242-0034 (8-252) > * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cell phone: 317-716-4541 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 4:25 PM > To: Servers Alive Discussion List > Subject: RE: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally > > Between the perfmon and windows diskspace checks, it is running around > 55 of the 101 configured checks. > > >> Do you have a lot of Perfmon checks in your configuration? >> >> Jim Ferrell >> EDS - Allison Transmission >> 4700 W 10th St >> Mail Code 462-470-H04 >> Indianapolis, IN 46222 >> >> * phone: +01-317-242-0034 (8-252) >> * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Cell phone: 317-716-4541 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 11:35 AM >> To: Servers Alive Discussion List >> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally >> >> I have a nack for causing confusion! :-) >> >> All of the checks that fail do so with a message "Lack of > resources"... >> >> The XP system running SA is completely unresponsive and cannot even be > >> managed from the KVM. >> >> The remote systems were all just fine. >> >> -R >> >>> Now I'm loosing you :-) >>> >>> The remote systems don't respond, and you have to reboot the XP? >>> So the remote systems are the XPs? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dirk Bulinckx. >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 5:16 PM >>> To: Servers Alive Discussion List >>> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally >>> >>> No, when all of the check start failing, the remote system won't even > >>> respond on the Dell IP based KVM. XP is seriously frozen and requires > >>> a physical power recycle. >>> >>> I have kicked around the idea of doing some local perfmon checks to >>> log and graph with RRD which would help watch memory consumption for >>> example. >>> >>> -R >>> >>>> Can you do a NET VIEW towards those remote system from your XP >>>> system >> >>>> and from other systems? >>>> >>>> >>>> Dirk Bulinckx. >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>>> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 5:01 PM >>>> To: Servers Alive Discussion List >>>> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally >>>> >>>> The remote side of the checks are almost exclusively on Windows 2000 > >>>> Pro and Server. With some hitting 2003 server. I am not checking >>>> any >> >>>> systems that are running XP. >>>> >>>>> Are those checks on the WinXP system or on a remote system? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dirk Bulinckx. >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > >>>>> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 4:41 PM >>>>> To: Servers Alive Discussion List >>>>> Subject: [SA-list] Checks fail due to lack of resources locally >>>>> >>>>> I am having a troubling condition with Servers Alive running on >>>>> Windows XP Professional. After running for a period of time (this >>>>> time it has been up for 4 days), all of the complex checks like >>>>> Windows Process checks, file checks, print spoolers, cpu and >>>>> pagespace, etc. fail with a message similar >>>>> to: >>>>> >>>>> Clframe1 % CPU (DOWN) 100% CPU check (running at Not enough >>>>> resources are available to complete this operation. %, check time: >>>>> 187 ms) >>>>> >>>>> So my first question is, Should I be using something other than >>>>> Windows XP (i.e. Windows 2000 or 2003)? My SA v4 never had this >>>>> issue, though I have added a lot more perfmon based checks and com >>>>> based checks, and RRD logging and graphing. I am stumped and hate >>>>> the thought that the fix is a daily reboot of the servers alive >> system. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks in advance! >>>>> >>>>> Rob Petty >>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >>>>> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like >>>>> out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send >>>>> to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a >>>>> message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. >>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >>>>> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like >>>>> out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send >>>>> to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a >>>>> message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. >>>>> >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >>>> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like >>>> out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send >>>> to >> >>>> the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a >>>> message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >>>> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like >>>> out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send >>>> to >> >>>> the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a >>>> message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. >>>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >>> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like >>> out-of-the-office >> >>> messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to >>> the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this >>> will get you removed from the list. >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >>> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like >>> out-of-the-office >> >>> messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to >>> the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this >>> will get you removed from the list. >>> >> >> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office > >> messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to >> the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this >> will get you removed from the list. >> >> To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to >> [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office > >> messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to >> the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this >> will get you removed from the list. >> > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office > messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the > individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get > you removed from the list. > > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to > [email protected] > If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make > sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of > the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the > list. > To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to [email protected] If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list.
