Re: Problems with the load of my servers

[Guillaume François]

And what about a different hardcoded sleep in each XX.sh script ?

2016-01-14 11:37 GMT+01:00 Ferran Mengibar Pastor <address@hidden>:

Hi,

I thought about that, but It's not possible :(

I have x servers, but every server have a different configuration.

For example

Server 1 : program 1,10,11,12,13,14,15...

Server 2 : program 1,2,3,4,10,11,12,13,14,15...

....

And too, I need the output of every check program for generate an automatically alarm with monit.

Thanks

Ferran

2016-01-14 10:57 GMT+01:00 Tino Hendricks <address@hidden>:

Hello,

sounds to me like essentially you don’t want synchronous execution. So why not „concat" all  XX.sh into a single 1_to_25.sh and let it handle it sequentially?

Tino

> Am 14.01.2016 um 10:06 schrieb Ferran Mengibar Pastor <address@hidden>:
>
> Hello,
> I have a problem with the load of my servers and the number of "check programs" of my monit configuration (5.12.1 v)
>
> In the documentation, we can see:
> Program checks are asynchronous. Meaning that Monit will not wait for the program to exit, but instead, Monit will start the program in the background and immediately continue checking the next service entry in monitrc.
>
> My config file (example):
> set daemon 120
>
> check program 1 with path 1.sh
>   if status = 1 then alert
> check program 2 with path 2.sh
>   if status = 1 then alert
> ......
> check program 24 with path 24.sh
>   if status = 1 then alert
> check program 25 with path 25.sh
>   if status = 1 then alert
>
> Every program takes between 5 and 10 seconds.
>
> The problem is that in less than 1 second I have the machine with all the programs in state of running .... but with a load average of 30.
>
> Could it be possible to execute all these programs, but limit only 5/10 running at time?
>
> I mean (I write an example with my config file and with 5 of limit).
> Start : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
> Run   : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
> End  : 1 ---> start only the 6
> Run  : 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
> End  : 2 and 3 ---> start 7 and 8
> ...
> Run  : 21,22,23,24,25 (25 is the last one)
> End  : 21
> Run  : 22, 23, 24,25
> End  : 22, 23, 24
> Run  : 25
> End  : 25
>
> Wait 120 seconds for the next iteration
>
> It's possible? Or maybe we have a variable like asynchronousLimit?
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Ferran Mengibar Pastor
> Delivery Service
>
>

> Tél. : +34 972 982 967
>
> www.augure.com
>
> Blog: Reputation in action
> Skype: dragglori
> Access map: Augure Girona
>
> --
> To unsubscribe:
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-general


--
To unsubscribe:
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-general

--

Ferran Mengibar Pastor

Delivery Service 

Tél. : +34 972 982 967

www.augure.com

 

Blog: Reputation in action 

Skype: dragglori 

Access map: Augure Girona

--
To unsubscribe:
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monit-general

--

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/IT d(+) s++:- a C++$ ULC(+)>+++$ !P--- L+>$ !E---? W+++$ !N* !o-- K--? w(+) !O---? !M- !V--? PS+? !PE Y+ PGP++>+++ !t-- !5 !X- R(+)>++* tv-? b(-) DI !D- G(+)>+ e+++ h--() r->$ y?*
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------