Re: monit unresponsive to status requests?

[Randy Bias]

On Jul 15, 2005, at 6:27 AM, Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
> On 15. jul. 2005, at 09.51, Marco Ermini wrote:
> > Same for me. I don't want OpenView to trigger errors because Monit is
> > not responsive...
> > Don't blame me but this is not so "minor" problem IMHO. If you have
> > first level support 24/7/365 it isn't nice to trigger them uneeded
> > critical alarms...
> Ok, I understand and I can see the problem. I have added this as a 
> task that we need to fix in the next release of monit. See 
> http://www.tildeslash.com/monit/doc/next.php#23.

Great.  That's excellent.

> > >         Actually, this reminds me of another question, that should 
> > > arguably be
> > > in a separate e-mail:  Have you considered having monit handle 
> > > multiple
> > > PIDs in a file or multiple PID files for a single "service" that has
> > > multiple processes.  For example, nfsd typically starts up with
> > > multiple processes.  It would be nice to tell monit:  make sure there
> > > are always 8 of these running and gave it 8 PIDs to check.  This 
> > > seems
> > > like a very useful feature.
> > This is what OpenView already did... an this is another reason because
> > I can't scale Monit in a bigger environment, it is confined to minor
> > projects by now.
>
> I'm not sure how we should go about solving this problem. If you have 
> any ideas, please share.

It seems straightforward to me, but then again, I'm not a heavy 
developer.  Turn the integer storage of the PID into a storage of an 
array of integers 1+ PIDs up to N.  Put loops around each section of 
code that normally assumes one PID.  Loop through each PID and perform 
the appropriate operation.  Keep a counter of success.  Match it 
against the specified number of running processes.  If we've dropped 
below the number of specified minimum PIDs, restart the service.

Now, that said, I haven't gone through the monit code very deeply.  
Mostly just scanning through validate.c.  So it may architecturally be 
an issue.

Look forward to your response.



--Randy