Edward Ned Harvey (lopser) wrote: > a bunch of users will get "page cannot be displayed" and you won't know > about it > . . . > We have systems that periodically (every minute) download pages from > the server, and alert us if they don't get the expected results. > . . . > But if we've configured the MPM resources too small . . . users will > be affected, and we're not alerted.
I don't see how that can be true: If "a bunch of users" will get errors, I believe your page download tester will also see those same errors. If it's not seeing those errors, what good is it? Yes, you should still be looking at your logs, but I believe that what's more critical is that you monitor the service *from the user's point of view*, and that monitoring should reflect the users' experiences as closely as possible. If you do that, you'll know when things are wrong without having to look at the logs and say something like "oh, we alsl need to add <string1> and <string2> to the 'this is an error' list." Someone else mentioned Simple Event Correlator; I suspect you'll need that (or something like it) for analysing your logs to catch the case of "line 1 followed (eventually) by lines 2 and 3 and (later) line 4" because it takes all of those to find certain kinds of errors. Adam _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list Tech@lists.lopsa.org https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
