I am running Server 2003 as the host and it has worked fine for me so
far, I have not seen any of this behaviour.
Mark Perry
Systems & Networks Administrator
Telephonetics VIP Ltd
"making sound
business sense"
Simply dial +44 (0)1442 242 242 and ask for me by name.
www.telephoneticsVIP.co.uk
Providing innovative hosted and customer premises speech recognition and
voice automation solutions.
Disclaimer: available at
http://www.telephoneticsVIP.co.uk/telephonetics/emaildisclaimer.jsp or
by sending email to <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
applies to this email.
Registered address: 7th Floor, Hamilton House, 111 Marlowes, Hemel
Hempstead, Hertfordshire HP1 1BB
Registered in England No: 2831215
-----Original Message-----
From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Trevor MacDougall
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 3:20 PM
To: Servers Alive Discussion List
Subject: Re: [SA-list] Generic SSH command checker (COM CHECK)
This COM Check is very welcomed, however there a few issues:
I've installed it created a new check that use the "should be less than"
function and
applied the options and closed the check. If I open the check again to
edit it, the
function has changed to "should be greater than".
Also, on occasion, when I open the check and click the "configure"
button, nothing happens. I have to delete the check, and recreate it to
get it to work.
Running SA as a service on XP. Restarting the service doesn't seem to
help.
Trevor
Dirk Bulinckx wrote:
> Have a go with the updated version...
> http://beta.woodstone.nu/soft/setup_genSSHCom.exe
>
>
> Dirk Bulinckx.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Perry
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:46 PM
> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Generic SSH command checker (COM CHECK)
>
> Good question,
>
> It obviously would be more useful to most on a down in a crisis
> situation, however that said There are good reasons e.g.
>
> It is good to know what the output was esp if you messed up your check
> then SA would report everything was fine because your criteria was not
> included in the error code, unless you also have SA check if an error
> was returned but even then what if the command was sytaxically correct
> but not doing as you expect, also other reason are extended
> diagnostics, information logging global stats, graphic represenataion
> e.g.
>
> If I set a check to test memory, cpu, disk (io, not usage) utilisation
> this could be monitored over time and graphically represented.
>
> This is a little speculative as my need is for alerts rather than
> historic evidence as I am lucky enough to have superiors that have no
> need for stats. We are all too busy doing actual work for that ;0)
>
> Mark Perry
>
> Systems & Networks Administrator
>
> Telephonetics VIP Ltd
>
>
>
> "making sound
>
> business sense"
>
>
>
> Simply dial +44 (0)1442 242 242 and ask for me by name.
>
> www.telephoneticsVIP.co.uk
>
> Providing innovative hosted and customer premises speech recognition
> and voice automation solutions.
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: available at
> http://www.telephoneticsVIP.co.uk/telephonetics/emaildisclaimer.jsp or
> by sending email to <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> applies to this email.
>
> Registered address: 7th Floor, Hamilton House, 111 Marlowes, Hemel
> Hempstead, Hertfordshire HP1 1BB
>
> Registered in England No: 2831215
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 11:31 AM
> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Generic SSH command checker (COM CHECK)
>
> About the 2nd suggestion; would this be only on a DOWN that it should
> give that info or also on an UP?
> (I would make it an option to include it, just wondering if you see
> this for all statusses or only for a down one)
>
> Dirk Bulinckx.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Perry
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 12:10 PM
> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
> Subject: RE: [SA-list] Generic SSH command checker (COM CHECK)
>
> Hi Dirk this check is great, though could I possibly suggest as couple
> or changes?
>
> 1. Expand the result parms to look for "less than <" and "greater
> than
>> " as well as should/should not caontain.
>
> 2. Could you also have the extended error variable or variable than
> seem suitable also include the returned output of the command run e.g.
>
> I set a test check to look for high cpu usage on a multi cpu server
> per cpu, each cpu is tested individually and the result would be
> returned as
>
>
> "CPU <cpu number> under heavy load"
>
> Is it possible using this check to output each line which matches the
> criteria set in the test?
>
> As it currently stands all I receive is a message saying:
>
> <Server> is reporting a problem with external COM check (*NIX Generic
> SSH Command Checker).
> Date: 22/02/2008
> Time: 10:45
> Additional Info: 750 ms
> Error Returned: Output contains heavy load
>
> Instead it would be preferrable for something along these lines where
> after the SA message it also included the actual output of the command
> for each line that matches:
>
> crmhost-poole is reporting a problem with external COM check (*NIX
> Generic SSH Command Checker).
> Date: 22/02/2008
> Time: 10:45
> Additional Info: 750 ms
> Error Returned: Output contains heavy load:
> CPU 1 is under heavy load
> CPU 3 is under heavy load
>
> Regards
>
> Mark Perry
>
> Systems & Networks Administrator
>
> Telephonetics VIP Ltd
>
>
>
> "making sound
>
> business sense"
>
>
>
> Simply dial +44 (0)1442 242 242 and ask for me by name.
>
> www.telephoneticsVIP.co.uk
>
> Providing innovative hosted and customer premises speech recognition
> and voice automation solutions.
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: available at
> http://www.telephoneticsVIP.co.uk/telephonetics/emaildisclaimer.jsp or
> by sending email to <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> applies to this email.
>
> Registered address: 7th Floor, Hamilton House, 111 Marlowes, Hemel
> Hempstead, Hertfordshire HP1 1BB
>
> Registered in England No: 2831215
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 8:56 PM
> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
> Subject: [SA-list] Generic SSH command checker (COM CHECK)
>
> A new External COM check was created for "generic" SSH commands.
> It's using the same logic as the already existing diskspace and
> process checker for *nix.
>
>
> Have a go with it and let us know if it works fine for
> you....http://beta.woodstone.nu/soft/setup_genSSHCom.exe
>
>
>
> Dirk Bulinckx.
>
> 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.
