> I solved it by re-defining the check to use flock
OK, thanks, that will work. The drawback is that the time waiting for the lock
counts as the plugin already running.
It would be nicer if Icinga 2 had a generic mechanism for that.
___
icinga-users mail
> However, do both servers reply to a request from the same MAC address, when
> they're both functioning normally (and not in failover mode)?
Yes, of course. They both send DHCPOFFERs in response to the DHCPDISCOVER. The
client then choses which server to send a DHCPREQUEST to, which answers with
On Monday 06 August 2018 at 19:47:53, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > Why would you have two DHCP servers visible (on the same interface and
> > therefore the same subnet) to a single host?
>
> Redundancy, of course. And yes, the ISC dhcpd is desinged to cope with
> that.
Indeed - I use it like that myself
> Why would you have two DHCP servers visible (on the same interface and
> therefore the same subnet) to a single host?
Redundancy, of course. And yes, the ISC dhcpd is desinged to cope with that.
___
icinga-users mailing list
icinga-users@lists.icinga.o
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 18:06:16 +0200
Edgar Fuß wrote:
> Is there a mathod to prevent, on the same machine, two concurrent
> invocations of the same plugin (without preventing concurrent
> invocations of any plugins)? For example, with check_dhcp, the second
> invocation is bound to fail because it c
On Monday 06 August 2018 at 19:16:20, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > Maybe give us an example of a configuration which is running into
> > problems?
>
> I already gave that: Two Service definitions checking DHCP on different
> DHCP servers via a CheckCommand definition using check_dhcp.
Why would you have
> Each service check combination (ie: host + service) uses its own timeouts.
> The same check on different servers manage their timeouts independently.
> Different checks on the same server manage their timeouts independently.
Yes, I do know all that.
> Maybe give us an example of a configuration
On Monday 06 August 2018 at 18:51:31, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > Surely this is handled by your combination of check_timeout and
> > check_interval values?
>
> If I monitor several different DHCP servers?
Each service check combination (ie: host + service) uses its own timeouts.
The same check on dif
On Monday 06 August 2018 at 18:45:59, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Monday 06 August 2018 at 18:06:16, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > Is there a mathod to prevent, on the same machine, two concurrent
> > invocations of the same plugin (without preventing concurrent invocations
> > of any plugins)? For example, w
> Surely this is handled by your combination of check_timeout and
> check_interval
> values?
If I monitor several different DHCP servers?
___
icinga-users mailing list
icinga-users@lists.icinga.org
https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users
On Monday 06 August 2018 at 18:06:16, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> Is there a mathod to prevent, on the same machine, two concurrent
> invocations of the same plugin (without preventing concurrent invocations
> of any plugins)? For example, with check_dhcp, the second invocation is
> bound to fail because i
Is there a mathod to prevent, on the same machine, two concurrent invocations
of the same plugin (without preventing concurrent invocations of any plugins)?
For example, with check_dhcp, the second invocation is bound to fail because it
can't grab the bootpc port.
12 matches
Mail list logo
