UCD-MIB for bsnmpd?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

UCD-MIB for bsnmpd?

Alan Amesbury
The stock bsnmpd implementation in FreeBSD 6 and 7 is somewhat lacking
in terms of being able to report CPU and disk I/O stats as reported by
the version of net-snmp in the ports tree (net-snmp-5.3.2_1).  In
particular, net-snmp does relatively straightforward reporting of things
like ssCpuUser, diskIONRead, etc.  However, it currently lacks the HC
(64-bit) counters for IF-MIB found in bsnmpd.  A quick check of the docs
accompanying net-snmp (README.agent-mibs) suggest that Linux is the only
OS for which net-snmp provides the ifXTable support apparently needed
for HC counters.

I'd like to run bsnmpd, but need the UCD-MIB for other performance
monitoring.  I could run net-snmp and proxy requests through it to
bsnmpd, but that strikes me as inelegant.  There's a bsnmpd-ucd module
at Google

        http://bsnmp-ucd.googlecode.com/


which is seems to work, except for some minor bugs in what it reports
for laLoadFloat.[123].  Have any of you experience with this?  Are there
plans to add it to the ports tree?  (There's already a ports-compatible
tarball.)  Alternatively, are any of you using the IF-MIB HC counters
with an SNMP daemon that also supports UCD-MIB and, if so, which one?

Thanks in advance for any information you can provide!


--
Alan Amesbury
University of Minnesota
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UCD-MIB for bsnmpd?

Alan Amesbury
Alan Amesbury wrote:

[snip]

> I'd like to run bsnmpd, but need the UCD-MIB for other performance
> monitoring.  I could run net-snmp and proxy requests through it to
> bsnmpd, but that strikes me as inelegant.  There's a bsnmpd-ucd module
> at Google
>
> http://bsnmp-ucd.googlecode.com/
>
>
> which is seems to work, except for some minor bugs in what it reports
> for laLoadFloat.[123].  Have any of you experience with this?  Are there
> plans to add it to the ports tree?
[snip]

Since no one else responded to this thread, I'm assuming I'm the only
one using this feature... at least on *this* list.  :-)  For what it's
worth, v0.1.3 appears to work as expected.  I've been able to narrow
down some performance problems on one of my systems.  (It appears to be
dropping packets when traffic exceeds ~120Kpkts/sec, vs. its near twin
which seems fine at ~190Kpkts/sec).

It'd still be nice to get bsnmp-ucd into the stock ports tree, though,
as I think other people might eventually benefit from it.  Should that
request be done through a PR?

As always, thanks in advance!


--
Alan Amesbury
University of Minnesota
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UCD-MIB for bsnmpd?

Miroslav Lachman
Alan Amesbury wrote:

> Alan Amesbury wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>I'd like to run bsnmpd, but need the UCD-MIB for other performance
>>monitoring.  I could run net-snmp and proxy requests through it to
>>bsnmpd, but that strikes me as inelegant.  There's a bsnmpd-ucd module
>>at Google
>>
>> http://bsnmp-ucd.googlecode.com/
>>
>>
>>which is seems to work, except for some minor bugs in what it reports
>>for laLoadFloat.[123].  Have any of you experience with this?  Are there
>>plans to add it to the ports tree?
>
> [snip]
>
> Since no one else responded to this thread, I'm assuming I'm the only
> one using this feature... at least on *this* list.  :-)  For what it's
> worth, v0.1.3 appears to work as expected.  I've been able to narrow
> down some performance problems on one of my systems.  (It appears to be
> dropping packets when traffic exceeds ~120Kpkts/sec, vs. its near twin
> which seems fine at ~190Kpkts/sec).
>
> It'd still be nice to get bsnmp-ucd into the stock ports tree, though,
> as I think other people might eventually benefit from it.  Should that
> request be done through a PR?
>
> As always, thanks in advance!

I am not using bsnmp-ucd so I will not help you with problems. If you
want it in the ports tree, I think the best way to do it is contacting
the author of bsnmp-ucd to ask him to do the port / submit it (by PR) to
the official ports tree. Or you can do it your self and submit it and be
the maintainer of the port.
Once it hits the ports tree, it gets better attention and bugs will be
(can be) fixed faster.

Miroslav Lachman

_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: UCD-MIB for bsnmpd?

Alexander Leidinger
Quoting Miroslav Lachman <[hidden email]> (from Tue, 29 Jan 2008  
20:45:30 +0100):

> Alan Amesbury wrote:
>
>> Alan Amesbury wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> I'd like to run bsnmpd, but need the UCD-MIB for other performance
>>> monitoring.  I could run net-snmp and proxy requests through it to
>>> bsnmpd, but that strikes me as inelegant.  There's a bsnmpd-ucd module
>>> at Google
>>>
>>> http://bsnmp-ucd.googlecode.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> which is seems to work, except for some minor bugs in what it reports
>>> for laLoadFloat.[123].  Have any of you experience with this?  Are there
>>> plans to add it to the ports tree?
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> Since no one else responded to this thread, I'm assuming I'm the only
>> one using this feature... at least on *this* list.  :-)  For what it's
>> worth, v0.1.3 appears to work as expected.  I've been able to narrow
>> down some performance problems on one of my systems.  (It appears to be
>> dropping packets when traffic exceeds ~120Kpkts/sec, vs. its near twin
>> which seems fine at ~190Kpkts/sec).
>>
>> It'd still be nice to get bsnmp-ucd into the stock ports tree, though,
>> as I think other people might eventually benefit from it.  Should that
>> request be done through a PR?
>>
>> As always, thanks in advance!
>
> I am not using bsnmp-ucd so I will not help you with problems. If you
> want it in the ports tree, I think the best way to do it is contacting
> the author of bsnmp-ucd to ask him to do the port / submit it (by PR)
> to the official ports tree. Or you can do it your self and submit it
> and be the maintainer of the port.
> Once it hits the ports tree, it gets better attention and bugs will be
> (can be) fixed faster.

People with a strong interest in seeing this in the base system could  
also contact syrinx@ and/or harti@, as they take care about bsnmpd.

Bye,
Alexander.

--
We all agree on the necessity of compromise.  We just can't agree on
when it's necessary to compromise.
                -- Larry Wall

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137
_______________________________________________
[hidden email] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[hidden email]"