From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 29 17:06:00 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D7D616A419 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:06:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amesbury@umn.edu) Received: from mta-a2.tc.umn.edu (mta-a2.tc.umn.edu [134.84.119.206]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A72F13C4CC for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:05:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amesbury@umn.edu) Received: from paulaner.oitsec.umn.edu (paulaner.oitsec.umn.edu [160.94.247.212]) by mta-a2.tc.umn.edu (UMN smtpd) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:05:56 -0600 (CST) X-Umn-Remote-Mta: [N] paulaner.oitsec.umn.edu [160.94.247.212] #+LO+TS+AU Message-ID: <479F5CF4.4020000@umn.edu> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:05:56 -0600 From: Alan Amesbury User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071203) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: <478FBC91.1060606@umn.edu> In-Reply-To: <478FBC91.1060606@umn.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: UCD-MIB for bsnmpd? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:06:00 -0000 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