nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [nv-l] snmpCollect

To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] snmpCollect
From: Joe Fernandez <jfernand@kardinia.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:37:45 +1100
Delivery-date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 02:46:34 +0000
Envelope-to: nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk
In-reply-to: <C353F42ACF29E240B9050B86F1852A4F0C26B1@nlspm204.emea.corp. eds.com>
Reply-to: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Sender: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
David,

Try the command

snmpCollect ?

which will tell you what the default value of NumberConcurrentSnmp is.

Unless this was a new installation of NetView, your "original" value may not be the default.

The statement that you can increase it if you have network capacity and NetView system capacity makes sense to me.

My guess is that to increase the number of concurrent requests snmpCollect is going to have to maintain more state information or fork off new processes. In each case this will need more CPU and memory and the question is where does it start hitting limits on your box.

You should be able to see what happens by monitoring the trace file as you increase the number.

I suggested the -S switch in my previous email. Did that give you configuration information that shed some light?

Do you have verbose tracing on?  (-V and -T switches.)



At 01:33 PM 01-02-05 +0000, you wrote:
Joe,

Thanks. The original config from our NV was 200 and I changed to 100 and 50
and back to 100. I read somewhere if the network capacity and NV box (CPU)
have no problem we can have it increased.

Rgds,
David

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com [mailto:owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com]On
Behalf Of Joe Fernandez
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 1:56 PM
To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Subject: RE: [nv-l] snmpCollect


At 08:11 AM 31-01-05 +0000, you wrote:
>Thanks Joe,
>
>There are no files in the ../snmpCollect directory (files with 0 length).
>
>My NumberConcurrentSnmp is 100 and I made change on number of objects in
the
>database (from 10000 ro 20000) only.
>
>Regards,
>David

David,

I believe the default value of NumberConcurrentSnmp is 5, so 100 sounds
ambitious to me.

Did you increment it in steps and monitor the effect?

I would turn it back down, see if data is being collected, then increment
it in steps and check.

Try the -S switch also and look at the configuration information that it
writes to the trace file. This should tell you more about what is happening.



Joe Fernandez
Kardinia Software
jfernand@kardinia.com
www.kardinia.com

Joe Fernandez
Kardinia Software
jfernand@kardinia.com
www.kardinia.com



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web