NSCA forking problem

[Marc Powell]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-users-admin at lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:nagios-users-
> admin at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Frederik Vanhee
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 3:45 AM
> To: nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Nagios-users] NSCA forking problem
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm using Nagios 2b2 and NSCA 2.4 on a Suse Linux 8.2
> I have a setup where most host and service checks are done by
> distributed servers and all arive at the central Nagios server, where
> NSCA is running to accept these check results. (Let's say, 20
> distributed servers, checking 100 services each)
> 
> When I have a look in the program list 'ps -ef', I see that there are
> about 500 instances of NSCA running. When I restart NSCA, the amount
of
> instances grows quite quick again to about 500.
> 
> Is this normal behaviour ? Because I get in trouble having not enough
> processes available (cannot fork....), so I can tweak kernel
parameters
> to temporarely solve my problem but I would rather like NSCA opening
not
> so many child processes.


This is normal if you don't have nagios checking for external commands,
the command check interval is too long for the amount of updates you
have incoming or you have hardware problems (I've experienced all
three). I'd suggest you start by setting your command_check_interval in
nagios.cfg to be -1 to have nagios look for external commands as often
as it can.

--
Marc


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans!
Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net
Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey
Click here to start!  http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id5hix
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null