Ad Widget

Collapse

Any (free) character in item key

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Koral
    Member
    • Oct 2012
    • 30

    #1

    Any (free) character in item key

    Hello.
    I want to create an aggregate item depending on SNMP LLD items.
    Is it possible?
    Target: I have snmp lld item: ifOut.Errors on 4 switches (24 ports each) and 2 blades (11 ports each). I would like to create an item that will collect values from thoes LLD items. Then I could create a nice graph (with other infos like que and discards).
    Problem: in the aggregate item key I have to point the item key and as you know the item key is different for all ports.
    Question: is there any kind of way to point only a part of the item key?
    For ex: ifOut.Errors* or ifOut.Errors[] ???
    P.S. I can't use calculated items.
    Why? Firstly I would had to add by hand all items (=number of ports) (the same reason as you see above, there is no automative way to add items from lld).
    Secondly when I created all the calculated items that I needed (in/out: errors, discards, que) for the equipment I mentioned above, I killed zabbix server the CPU and memmory util was too high so I had to disable those calculated items.
    Last edited by Koral; 28-10-2012, 13:10.
  • jerrylenk
    Member
    Zabbix Certified Specialist
    • May 2010
    • 62

    #2
    I understand you want one item that is the sum of 24 SNMP values,
    and six of that kind per host, multiplied by six hosts...

    While I don't think zabbix could not handle that, you don't seem to be willing to create about 750 items, even with templates, cloning, etc.

    So what I'd do is to run snmpwalk over each of the SNMP values, run it's output through a perl-, awk- or even shell script that does the calculating and returns the single number you want. This could be used in an item of "external check" type.
    However, the workload on the server will be at least the same.

    Greetings, Jerry

    Comment

    • Koral
      Member
      • Oct 2012
      • 30

      #3
      thanks,
      we will see

      Comment

      Working...