NSCA Question and Hardware utilization question.

[Brady Maxwell]

Just curious to see how many NSCA transactions people are running in their
environments.

I am trying to send 3000 service check results every 5 minutes from one
machine to another.

I am using xinetd which seems to panic at this volume and shut itself down.

At 2200 service checks i did not have issues with xinetd.

I have also been trying to convince my coworker that we should be doing all
of the checks from one server so this would not be an issue. And the second
server can be the redundant fail over.

My server is 2 x dual core 2.0 Ghz, 8 GB of RAM and 6 300GB 15k disks in
raid 5 with a single 1Gb network connection. My current load on this machine
with 3000 + service checks in 5 minutes is around 10% cpu usage. About 2% of
that is nagios related. The total need for service checks will be about
12.5k every 5 minutes, we are implementing in phases. I think I can do this
all from one machine and replicate everything to my fail over server for
redundancy.
How many service checks are people doing in their environments and then
submiting with nsca and how many checks are people doing from one server?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.monitoring-lists.org/archive/users/attachments/20070730/55b96133/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
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