so you have to somehow convince vmware not to take snapshots through that virtualized ethernet devices. maybe an extra ethernet device would help. the first one left for that snapshots fiction and second for networking. On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 20:34:49 +0200 Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Am 05.06.2011 16:55, schrieb Lars Schotte: > > i definitely wouldnt come to that idea to monitor guests on guests > > w/ vnstat because even if it had worked perfectly, its still just a > > fictional ethernet device. > > what is there fictional? > > it is a ethernet-device with all features of a ethernet-device > ond the guest does know nothing about virtualization > > > maybe a vmware monitoring software would be > > more precise or an alternative would be to bind each to a virtual > > network card and do the monitoring on the host measuring only the > > output data and then routing all this devices out, thereby using the > > host as a router, which is of course a more complicated setup and i > > am not even sure if it would work, but thats the way i would try to > > build it up. > > jesus for what reason? > > the host is not a router, the host is a virtual switch > and yes you have monitoring on the vCenter-Server but not > in a console like output and not with exactly numbers > > this are two different worlds and i see no reason why > vnstat would not work on the guest because it does > > only while snapshots are taken / removed there are some > short untrue peaks which would be easaliy could filtered > in the guest-software only by their hughe numbers which are > clearly impossible and the problem is that this does not > happen and so if some measuring says "20 GB in two seconds" > all averages are destroyed > > > On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 16:20:16 +0200 > > Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> yes! > >> > >> works perfectly, only after dealing with snapshots there are > >> this horrible peaks on 64bit guests > >> > >> Am 05.06.2011 16:18, schrieb Lars Schotte: > >>> w8, so you are saying that you run vnstat on the guests? > >>> > >>> On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 16:16:44 +0200 > >>> Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Am 05.06.2011 16:12, schrieb Lars Schotte: > >>>>> is ifconfig showing this huge numberg at that time as well? > >>>> > >>>> not currently, but i have seen such outputs in "ifconfig" too > >>>> > >>>>> do you have a 64bit OS or 32bit? > >>>> > >>>> seems only affect x86_64 guests > >>>> good input - the voip-machine is the only 32bit and > >>>> does not show this > >>>> > >>>>> did you try to report it to vmware as well? > >>>> > >>>> they will anser "fedora is not official supported and > >>>> open-vm-tools vom rpmfusion too" on ESXi :-( > >>>> > >>>>> On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 16:06:48 +0200 > >>>>> Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> has anybody an idea for which package i should file a bugreport > >>>>>> for this? i guess "vnstat" is only the postman > >>>>>> > >>>>>> every night from friday to saturday from our > >>>>>> fedora-vmware-guests is made a snapshot by "VMware Data > >>>>>> Recovery" to take a consistent backup and while deleting the > >>>>>> snapshot something triggers horrible wrong values to "vnstat" > >>>>>> which makes monthly summary useless > >>>>>> > >>>>>> see below :-( > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> eth0 / daily > >>>>>> > >>>>>> day rx | tx | total | > >>>>>> avg. rate > >>>>>> ------------------------+-------------+-------------+--------------- > >>>>>> 05/07/11 16777216.00 TiB | 5.56 GiB | 16777216.00 TiB | > >>>>>> 1668.00 Tbit/s 05/08/11 855.27 MiB | 4.24 GiB | 5.07 > >>>>>> GiB | 492.63 kbit/s 05/09/11 2.35 GiB | 72.14 GiB | > >>>>>> 74.49 GiB | 7.23 Mbit/s 05/10/11 1.47 GiB | 11.41 GiB > >>>>>> | 12.88 GiB | 1.25 Mbit/s 05/11/11 1.11 GiB | 6.19 > >>>>>> GiB | 7.30 GiB | 708.76 kbit/s 05/12/11 1.17 GiB | > >>>>>> 5.82 GiB | 6.99 GiB | 678.38 kbit/s 05/13/11 1.12 GiB > >>>>>> | 6.50 GiB | 7.62 GiB | 739.88 kbit/s 05/14/11 > >>>>>> 33554432.00 TiB | 4.10 GiB | 33554432.00 TiB | 3336.00 Tbit/s > >>>>>> 05/15/11 778.85 MiB | 4.45 GiB | 5.21 GiB | 505.87 > >>>>>> kbit/s 05/16/11 1.30 GiB | 7.37 GiB | 8.67 GiB | 842.06 > >>>>>> kbit/s 05/17/11 1.38 GiB | 8.18 GiB | 9.56 GiB | 928.20 > >>>>>> kbit/s 05/18/11 1.21 GiB | 6.83 GiB | 8.04 GiB | > >>>>>> 780.32 kbit/s 05/19/11 1.03 GiB | 5.68 GiB | 6.72 GiB | > >>>>>> 652.10 kbit/s 05/20/11 1.11 GiB | 5.18 GiB | 6.29 > >>>>>> GiB | 610.67 kbit/s 05/21/11 16777216.00 TiB | 3.97 GiB | > >>>>>> 16777216.00 TiB | 1668.00 Tbit/s 05/22/11 902.15 MiB | > >>>>>> 6.74 GiB | 7.62 GiB | 739.58 kbit/s 05/23/11 1.28 GiB > >>>>>> | 16.56 GiB | 17.84 GiB | 1.73 Mbit/s 05/24/11 1.60 > >>>>>> GiB | 11.42 GiB | 13.02 GiB | 1.26 Mbit/s 05/25/11 > >>>>>> 1.47 GiB | 6.65 GiB | 8.12 GiB | 788.78 kbit/s > >>>>>> 05/26/11 1.23 GiB | 7.40 GiB | 8.64 GiB | 838.46 > >>>>>> kbit/s 05/27/11 1.43 GiB | 6.75 GiB | 8.19 GiB | > >>>>>> 794.70 kbit/s 05/28/11 33554432.00 TiB | 5.44 GiB | > >>>>>> 33554432.00 TiB | 3336.00 Tbit/s 05/29/11 855.65 MiB | 4.89 > >>>>>> GiB | 5.72 GiB | 555.47 kbit/s 05/30/11 1.43 GiB | > >>>>>> 9.20 GiB | 10.62 GiB | 1.03 Mbit/s 05/31/11 1.77 GiB > >>>>>> | 9.52 GiB | 11.29 GiB | 1.10 Mbit/s 06/01/11 1.51 > >>>>>> GiB | 9.43 GiB | 10.94 GiB | 1.06 Mbit/s 06/02/11 > >>>>>> 906.48 MiB | 5.90 GiB | 6.79 GiB | 658.85 kbit/s > >>>>>> 06/03/11 2.36 GiB | 9.40 GiB | 11.77 GiB | 1.14 > >>>>>> Mbit/s 06/04/11 16777216.00 TiB | 5.15 GiB | 16777216.00 > >>>>>> TiB | 1668.00 Tbit/s 06/05/11 585.88 MiB | 2.30 GiB | > >>>>>> 2.87 GiB | 417.64 kbit/s > >>>>>> ------------------------+-------------+-------------+--------------- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> estimated 877 MiB | 3.44 GiB | 4.30 GiB | > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > -- Lars Schotte @ Hana (F14)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
