[Nagiosplug-help] Re: unexpected check_procs behavior

[Voon, Ton]

check_procs --help?

The help for r1.3.1 was not super clear (to me). This is the text for the
upcoming r1.4. Do you think this is better? If not, what do you recommend?

---
RANGEs are specified 'min:max' or 'min:' or ':max' (or 'max'). If
specified 'max:min', a warning status will be generated if the
count is inside the specified range

This plugin checks the number of currently running processes and
generates WARNING or CRITICAL states if the process count is outside
the specified threshold ranges. The process count can be filtered by
process owner, parent process PID, current state (e.g., 'Z'), or may
be the total number of running processes

Examples:
 check_procs -w 2:2 -c 2:1024 -C portsentry
   Warning if not two processes with command name portsentry. Critical
   if < 2 or > 1024 processes

 check_procs -w 10 -a '/usr/local/bin/perl' -u root
   Warning alert if > 10 processes with command arguments containing 
   '/usr/local/bin/perl' and owned by root

 check_procs -w 50000 -c 100000 --metric=VSZ
   Alert if vsz of any processes over 50K or 100K
---

Ton

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jeff vier [mailto:jeff.vier at tradingtechnologies.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 2:39 PM
> To: nagiosplug-help
> Subject: [Nagiosplug-help] Re: unexpected check_procs behavior
> 
> 
> excellent.  thank you very much, it works like a charm.
> 
> Is this functionality documented anywhere?
> 
> On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 15:46, Karl DeBisschop wrote:
> > Jeff Vier writes: 
> > 
> > > Hello. 
> > > 
> > > I'm new to the list, so I hope this hasn't been addressed 
> recently. 
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to add a new check_procs command to verify 
> that at least
> > > one instance of a particular daemon is running.  I 
> THOUGHT if I ran: 
> > > 	[~]$ /usr/local/nrpe/check_procs -c 1 -C test
> > > I would get a critical (as there is no "test" daemon) but I get:
> > > 	OK - 0 processes running with command name test
> > > Is this expected behavior?  What command should I be 
> running to get it
> > > to throw a critical at 0 instances?
> > 
> > check_procs -c 1: -C test 
> > 
> > > Thank you for any help. 
> > > 
> > > --jeff 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > > http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Nagiosplug-help mailing list
> > > Nagiosplug-help at lists.sourceforge.net
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagiosplug-help
> > > ::: Please include plugins version (-v) and OS when 
> reporting any issue. 
> > > ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent 
> to /dev/null
> >  
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Nagiosplug-help mailing list
> Nagiosplug-help at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagiosplug-help
> ::: Please include plugins version (-v) and OS when reporting 
> any issue. 
> ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
> 


This private and confidential e-mail has been sent to you by Egg.
The Egg group of companies includes Egg Banking plc
(registered no. 2999842), Egg Financial Products Ltd (registered
no. 3319027) and Egg Investments Ltd (registered no. 3403963) which
carries out investment business on behalf of Egg and is regulated
by the Financial Services Authority.  
Registered in England and Wales. Registered offices: 1 Waterhouse Square,
138-142 Holborn, London EC1N 2NA.
If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have
received it in error, please notify the sender by replying with
'received in error' as the subject and then delete it from your
mailbox.