insure check interval

[Marc Powell]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:nagios-users-
> bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Chapin
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 1:57 PM
> To: nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net; jeff.chapin at t8design.com
> Subject: [Nagios-users] insure check interval
> 
> Hi list
> 
> Hello, I have a fairly small nagios setup (107 hosts, 134 services).
On
> one of my hosts, I have 12 services that need to be monitored as often
as
> possible. Ideally, the services would each be checked once a minute.
To do
> this, I have set the check_interval to 1 as well as the
> retry_check_interval to 1. Under normal circumstances this does a
check
> approximatly once a minute, give or take. However, every 24 hours a
slew
> of once every  24 hours checks start, and pushes the checks to more
than
> 20-30 minute intervals. I would love to set the priority on the
once-per-
> minute check, and let the once-per-day checks fill in as needed,
rather
> than hammer out all at once.
> 
> Any advice as to how to achieve this?

You can't prioritize one check over another as nagios automagically
figures out when they should run. I would expect though that if you have
an appropriate number set for max_concurrent_checks that nagios will run
both sets when expected in a timely manner. Do you have that value set
at a high enough level to cover both your 1 minute checks and your 24
hour checks?

--
Marc

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
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