Carolyn Beeton wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Spitzer, Andy (BL60:9D30)
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:05 PM
To: Beeton, Carolyn (CAR:9D60); Steinmann, Martin
(BL60:2500); [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] XECS-1316: alarm when HD is full
Woof!
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:58:09 -0400, Beeton, Carolyn
(CAR:9D60) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That is what mrtg does;
Yes.
we're already using it;
No. It's an optional componant. It's optional because there
is a large performance penalty for running it (the mrtg JPG
generating parts, not the snmp parts). It isn't recommended
for small underpowered systems (Pingtel's existing hardware
base, for example).
why not take advantage of its threshold monitoring as well?
Because it's overkill, and relies on an optional componant.
--Woof!
Could we make the expensive part of mrtg optional, and continue to use
it for basic monitoring?
I think it actually is optional. By default, mrtg does not monitor
anything and does not generate any graphs, and as I understand from
Woof, that's the performance penalty.
Right now mrtg isn't even started when it doesn't monitor anything, but
this is easy to change.
Andrei
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
