Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The vmware.xml has a bug on VM Processor #61

Open
jeffstokes72 opened this issue May 27, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

The vmware.xml has a bug on VM Processor #61

jeffstokes72 opened this issue May 27, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@jeffstokes72
Copy link

Something seems to have changed in VMWare's perfmon counters. The template was made to collect individually named VM Processor counter objects. I think the name changed at some point on these.

The easy button is to have the data collector change from the individual call-outs to just

	<Counter>\VM Processor(*)\*</Counter>

as opposed to

<Counter>\VM Processor\% Processor Time</Counter>
<Counter>\VM Processor\CPU stolen time</Counter>
<Counter>\VM Processor\Effective VM Speed in MHz</Counter>
<Counter>\VM Processor\Host processor speed in MHz</Counter>
<Counter>\VM Processor\Limit in MHz</Counter>
<Counter>\VM Processor\Reservation in MHz</Counter>
<Counter>\VM Processor\Shares</Counter>

It's a lame fix but it's all I have (I don't run vmware here).

@clinthuffman
Copy link
Owner

Each analysis in PAL must focus on a counter name, therefore \VM Processor(*)* will not work. I good update to the PAL Threshold File Editor would be to add a new analysis for each counter name. But at this point, I would rather completely rewrite PAL than fix this.

@jeffstokes72
Copy link
Author

The thing is @clinthuffman , its the collection that's bugged, not the analysis.
Can you just change the output of the template to include the *, but still do the individual counter analysis by exact name?

@clinthuffman
Copy link
Owner

clinthuffman commented May 23, 2021 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants