Netsaint server memory trouble investigation
"Sancho2k Lists" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.netsaint.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Greetz list, We've been getting low memory errors from our Netsaint 0.0.7 monitoring host for the last few weeks and just now had time to put some investigation into it.It is a dual-850 HP server with approximately 650 MB RAM running as follows: Red Hat Linux release 7.0 (Guinness) Kernel 2.2.16-22enterprise on a 2-processor i686 'top' shows as a pretty usual average: -- Mem: 646760K av, 631796K used, 14964K free -- Netsaint is monitoring 70 Hosts, 429 Services. Checking into a run from 'gtop' shows some alarming information: Some resident memory counts of the running Netsaint processes: -- 28@ 53600KB 78@ 161000KB 71@ 147000KB 105@ 217000KB The netsaint processes are all of the form: /usr/local/netsaint/bin/netsaint -d /usr/local/netsaint/etc/netsaint.cfg -- Some resident memory counts of the running httpd (Apache/1.3.14) -- 10@ 51000KB 14@ 70000KB -- Some resident memory counts of the running check_ping processes -- 30@ 15000KB -- And finally, viewing gtop sorted by Total Size of Processes (Memory) is a process called 'minilogd': -- 1@ 238708KB -- There are other services such as mysql and a couple of seperate web apps running on this server as well, but end up taking a fraction of the memory. So in begging for help from the community, what's the analysis? Is the box simply overloaded? Is the minilogd process to blame for the near-depleted memory? (And if so, what to do with it?) Or are the many and memory-hungry httpd and netsaint processes the direct result of Netsaint? (i.e can the heavy httpd usage be tied directly into Netsaint in any way..) Assuming that Netsaint is taxing the system right now, would a clustered or distruted model be in order at this point? Such as in the number of checks running on the server are driving it to its limit, or is there any way to optimize what is currently running on (it's not exactly a puny server). Would more memory be the correct answer, or only provide a greater amount to be chewed up all the same? TIA for any insight. -- Darren Spruell www.sancho2k.net ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf