[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "for X cycles" has no effect
From: |
Paul Theodoropoulos |
Subject: |
Re: "for X cycles" has no effect |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:33:16 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/49.0 |
On 10/7/16 15:03, address@hidden wrote:
When I add "for X cycles" to my statements in monitrc, e.g.,
if cpu usage > 95% for 5 cycles then alert
It has no effect. It alerts every cycle as if it was "for 1 cycles."
Is there something else I need to do for the limit to be reached multiple times
before alerting?
I am running monit-5.19.0 on Linux 3.19.8.
The CPU resource test doesn't use the word 'usage' in it - it's either just
if cpu > 95% [etc] or
if total cpu([user|system|wait]) > 95% [etc]
I found cpu too sensitive most of the time in my use-case, and stick
with just loadavg -
if loadavg (5min) is greater than 3.0 for 2 cycles then alert
that gives you a smooth(er) window against to test if the system is
really under continuous load or just dealing with a very brief spike or
spikes.
--
Paul Theodoropoulos
www.anastrophe.com
- "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/07
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect,
Paul Theodoropoulos <=
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/07
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/10
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/13
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, Martin Pala, 2016/10/17
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/17
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, Martin Pala, 2016/10/17
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/18
- Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, Martin Pala, 2016/10/19
Re: "for X cycles" has no effect, jobhunts02, 2016/10/20