BB Unix Network Monitor - Message
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: {bb} SSH checks not written to $BBVAR/logs
- To: bb@bb4.com
- Subject: Re: {bb} SSH checks not written to $BBVAR/logs
- From: Philip Clark <bblist@cannae.uklinux.net>
- Date: 01 Mar 2006 22:35:08 +0000
- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
- Content-type: text/plain
- In-reply-to: <43FF8ED3.8080200@holly.acsu.buffalo.edu>
- References: <43F0F341.200@holly.acsu.buffalo.edu> <43F337EA.1000807@holly.acsu.buffalo.edu> <1140052724.3326.99.camel@carter.pythonesque.net> <43FF5A11.9050307@holly.acsu.buffalo.edu> <43FF8ED3.8080200@holly.acsu.buffalo.edu>
- Reply-to: bb@bb4.com
- Sender: owner-bb@bb4.com
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 22:55, Eric Christian Berg wrote:
> Okay, after digging through the guts of Big Brother, here's what is
> happening. The two messages that are getting "lost" are after an http
> check which returns a fair amount of data. The bb-combo script is
> packaging them all together and sending them along to bb. However, only
> the first message appears to be getting processed and is truncated right
> near the end. The other two are getting lost.
>
> This would indicate to me that I had MAXLINE set too high. However, it
> is set to 8192, which is the same as in src/bb.h, and the combined size
> of the package is generally around 8105. Pulled the data through a hack
> to bb-combo.sh and tried running it through by hand after sizing it and
> got the same result, bb is cutting off the data and only processing the
> first (truncated) record. For the time being, I'm reducing MAXLINE by
> 1000 and this seems to have settled things down, but I'm curious as to
> what might cause this behavior.
That sounds logical. The reason that I suspected the ssh daemon was
because of the emphasis of security. I could imagine that it might
not reject further connections, but simply let the client hang
indefinitely.
Instead, it looks like the http check is being over-stretched. The
basic test normally only asks for the page headers to keep things
fast. That shouldn't generate too much data, but you might get
better results if you create a special, less complex, page for
BB to use.
If you are interested in testing a particular (non-trivial) page,
it might be better to use an external, web content testing script.
As an added advantage, you would also be able to run this at a
less frequent interval if appropriate.
Cheers, Phil.
--
There's no real need to do housework -- after four years it
doesn't get any worse.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
To unsubscribe from this list, or to subscribe to the bb-digest list
send e-mail to mailto:majordomo@bb4.com with unsubscribe bb -and/or-
subscribe bb-digest in the BODY of the message.
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index