RE: [nv-l] snmpCollect

2005-02-01 08:34:46
Subject: RE: [nv-l] snmpCollect
From: "Liu, David" <david.liu AT eds DOT com>
To: "'nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com'" <nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 13:33:21 -0000

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. 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT com [mailto:owner-nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT 
Behalf Of Joe Fernandez
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 1:56 PM
To: nv-l AT lists.us.ibm DOT 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
>database (from 10000 ro 20000) only.


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 AT kardinia DOT com

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