Re: AssertException in process_common.c [resurrecting old thread]

[Allen Shaw]

Yes, I suppose you're right, but I think that level of configuration is 
beyond me and lies with the VDS provider, right? I don't expect I could 
easily persuade them to change their setup. In this case, although 
monit's debug output does reveal the errors, it doesn't seem to 
adversely affect monit's performance. Do I have anything to worry about 
here, and then, would you guess there's something I can do *without* 
having the hosting service modify their VDS setup?

- Allen

Martin Pala wrote:

> This probably explains the problem :) These extensions such as VServer 
> or LIDS, etc. are able to hide processes.
>
> Monit builds the process tree for analysis starting from its root, 
> which is process 1 (init). Because this process is on your system 
> almost certainly hidden (but based on PPID value of 'orphaned' 
> processes it exists), monit will fail to build the tree.
>
> I think that it will be better to unhide init process in all contexts 
> then do some workaround in monit. The reason is, that init process 
> (PID = 1) is well-known and even as you can see, you can't hide it 
> completely (see the orphans PPID value). The 'unkillable' protection 
> is probably more adequate.
>
> Martin
>
> Allen Shaw wrote:
>
> > [replying to list....]
> >
> > Hi Christian,
> >
> > Yeah, you're right, there's no init process in that list, is there. 
> > Ha. Okay, maybe it's relevant that this is a "virtual dedicated 
> > server" environment. Gee, I should have said that before! Just didn't 
> > think of it at all. That would explain the other "lot of missing 
> > processes" wouldn't it.

--
===========================================================
Allen Shaw                                  address@hidden
IIFWP Data and                           914.631.1331 x.106
   IT Services                        http://www.iifwp.org