Re: SNMP Disk Space Negative Values
Christian Arnaut <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.mrtg.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Steve, Pardon my ignorance. How were you able to convert the 'signed' integer of -268468737 to an unsigned value of 4026498559? If I can do that with a bash script, I'm halfway home! Thanks, ~Christian From: [email protected] To: [email protected] CC: [email protected] Subject: RE: [mrtg] SNMP Disk Space Negative Values Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:46:58 +0000 Your E: drive is insanely huge at 15TB. Possibly something is using signed integers when it should be using unsigned… The -268468737 value is a signed representation for the unsigned integer 4026498559 (convert to hex and get 0xEFFF7DFF in both cases); multiply the unsigned value by the cluster size and you get your 15TB. Something is using an unsigned integer when it should be signed, or vice-versa. Steve Steve [email protected] From: mrtg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christian Arnaut Sent: Wednesday, 26 November 2014 11:05 a.m. To: [email protected] Subject: [mrtg] SNMP Disk Space Negative Values Am attempting to use MRTG to monitor disk space on a Windows Server as I have done on multiple servers and workstations in the past. However, this time the local storage capacity on the local drive partition is nearly 15TB. It appears that I have exceeded an SNMP threshold where the integer values are now negative numbers. For example to monitor total space on the C: drive I used (simplified)... iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4.2 * iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.2 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.3.2 = STRING: "C:\\ Label:" iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.3.4 = STRING: "E:\\ Label:" iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4.2 = INTEGER: 4096 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4.4 = INTEGER: 4096 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.2 = INTEGER: 10350335 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.5.4 = INTEGER: -268468737 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.2 = INTEGER: 6261795 iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.6.4 = INTEGER: -527400222 With the E: drive, iso.3.6.1.2.1.25.2.3.1.4.4 correctly shows the cluster size (4096). However, I am sure the total number of clusters isn't '-527400222'. Even if I used the absolute value of 527400222, the numbers don't add up to the 15TB partition size. Any suggestions? Or have I reached the limitation of MRTG for the purpose I am looking for? Thank you, in advance, for any assistance! ~Christian _______________________________________________ mrtg mailing list [email protected] https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/mrtg