[Nagiosplug-devel] [ nagiosplug-Bugs-1225470 ] check_swap performance info incorrect

[SourceForge.net]

Bugs item #1225470, was opened at 2005-06-22 12:55
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by tonvoon
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=397597&aid=1225470&group_id=29880

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Keith Edmunds (backseat)
>Assigned to: Ton Voon (tonvoon)
Summary: check_swap performance info incorrect

Initial Comment:
If check_swap is invoked with percentage aguments the
performance data is incorrect:

-------------------------------------------------------------------
$ ./check_swap -V
check_swap (nagios-plugins 1.4) 1.47

$ ./check_swap -w 30% -c 20%   
SWAP OK: 94% free (894 MB out of 954 MB)
|swap=893MB;286;190;0;953
-------------------------------------------------------------------

In the performance data section is:
value=893
warn=286
crit=190
min=0
max=953

The value is above both the warn and crit values, which
in this case is correct (ie, not an error). It would be
better if the performance data were presented in
percentage terms if the input is in percentage terms.

One solution would be to express the warning and
critical values as an @range (alarm if within range)
with a lower value of zero.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Ton Voon (tonvoon)
Date: 2005-08-01 22:05

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=664364

Keith,

You are correct - the perf data is wrong. I think your suggestion of the 
"@" to signify an alert within the range is the right way to go, but:

1. The perfdata library routine doesn't currently support this
2. I'm worried about the inconsistency with the command line 
parameters

I'm going to park this for now (to get the 1.4.1 release out), but will get a 
working solution in the next few months.

BTW, it was decided that percentages would not be used because you 
can work out the percentages from the absolute values, whereas you 
cannot do it the other way round.

Ton

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=397597&aid=1225470&group_id=29880