Topic Options
#1190 - 07/11/04 05:55 PM Max locations
Anonymous
Unregistered


Is there an upper limit to the number of sites that be pinged? I'm at about 134 now, but growing. Any downsides to increasing that? I'm kinda scared at what will happen when we lose a big chuck of our network at once. Will I get a ton of e-mails or one with a list of sites in alarm? Three guesses which one I would like. How many sites are you tracking now?

Top
#1191 - 07/12/04 01:14 AM Re: Max locations
Pete Ness Offline



Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 1106
Loc: Boise, Idaho
Hi, Ray.

134 if on the large side. Theoretically, there isn't a limit, but we only do consistent testing up to 100 targets.

You're almost certainly going to get a whole pile of emails if you lose a big chunk of your network at once. This is something we'd like to improve the logic on a bit, but we've had very little feedback on it, so your feedback on this is most welcome.

Top
#1192 - 04/25/05 12:20 PM Re: Max locations [Re: Pete Ness]
Anonymous
Unregistered


Just as an FYI for everyone.

I pretty consistantly run up to 12 instances of multiping with 100-120 targets apiece. (~1000+ targets) This is plugged into a fairly fat pipe (10Mb).

I am using a Sony machine (factory loaded, yech) with XP Media Edition. 3.4 Ghz Intell, 1Gb of Ram. CPU runs about 80% average with ALL GRAPHING TURNED OFF.

Turning ON graphing for 100 targets at a time results in about 5% increase in processor load.

Very robust tool, very usefull. Just wish it had all the options that PingPlotter does...

Top
#1193 - 04/25/05 12:22 PM Re: Max locations
Anonymous
Unregistered


Forgot to mention.

I have all targets set to 56 byte packets, pinging once per second, with samples to include set to 200.

Top
#1194 - 06/06/05 05:46 PM Re: Max locations
Anonymous
Unregistered


Acutally, I was completely wrong above...I could only run that many instances becuase I had them sorted by things like Packet loss, Max ping time etc...and that ATE up CPU time.

Once I sorted by DNS name (that obviously does not change) the CPU utilization for the same set up as above dropped to 22%

Obviously, you can run a metric butt-ton (thats 2 craploads for the technicaly minded) of instances with NO issues...and a fat pipe.

Multi-ping ROCKS! (now please give it the rest of the functionality that Ping-Plotter has!)

Top
#1195 - 06/24/05 12:33 PM Re: Max locations
Pete Ness Offline



Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 1106
Loc: Boise, Idaho
Thanks for sharing this scenario with us!

Top
#1196 - 09/12/07 06:48 PM Re: Max locations
Anonymous
Unregistered


I just discovered the sort choice effects on the CPU load. Mid 40's if I'm sorted on PL% or Err. 4% if by anything that doesn't change. I'm at 210 endpoints in MultiPing and growing. This is all happening on my desktop, not a dedicated server. Now that I'm running 3 screens, MultiPing is on my left running right along. No impact on my other work which is often 10-20 applications all running at once.

Pentium 4, 2.40 GHz, 1Gig RAM, Win 2000 SP4.

The stability is wonderful. I wish my other apps were this good.

Thanks again for a great product.

Top
#1197 - 09/13/07 05:19 PM Re: Max locations
Pete Ness Offline



Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 1106
Loc: Boise, Idaho
Hi, Ray.

Thanks for the feedback.

Each time the data is refreshed, the list resorts. This means, with 210 endpoints, the refresh is going to be pretty much continuous. As you increase your endpoint count, the refreshing will happen more often - and the CPU load increases.

This shouldn't be an impossible problem to solve, so I've added it to the change request list.

- Pete

Top

Search

Who's Online
0 registered (), 7 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod