Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
The cacti documentation mentions that the syntax for script output is:
<name1>:<value1> <name2:value2> ...
It seems that switching to cactid 0.86g that only the first name/value pair is recognized and an error is displayed when cacti is run in debug mode:
CACTID: Host[34] DS[1710] WARNING: Result from SCRIPT not valid. Partial Result: ...
CACTID: Host[34] DS[1710] SCRIPT: /var/xxxstatus.sh buzzsaw.xxx.xxx, output: U
Are there limitations w/ cactid concerning script output?
Hmm, not sure on this. But please verify that your script does exactly one single print, no loop. cactid won't wait until a second, third, ... print is invoked.
Reinhard
I saw that thread. It looks like a nice graph. However, I have other scripts that were graphing as well. I was using my old poller script as an example.
cactid 0.86g according to the tarball name, but the version string compiled in from the src says "0.86f".
I am refering to the following stmt from denow:
If i am not wrong cactid doesn't allow multiple return values. Either u have to rewrite your perl script to return a single value at a time or use cmd.php
Witness posted ~3 hrs later and did not correct him. I assumed this lack of correction was intentional.
So, I guess I am looking to see if cactid is missing the feature mentioned in the online docs ( http://www.cacti.net/downloads/docs/htm ... cacti.html ) or if there is some other way to get these multiple name/value pair outputs to work.
For further understanding, my motivation is that cmd.php pushes the host to a load of 7+ w/ a total polling time of 130 sec or so compared to cactid w/ a load of < 1 and a polling time of 20sec for ~125 devices.
The multi output pairs do work in Cactid 0.8.6g. There must be something else going on. It is likely a dangling space at the end of your output. Is there any way for you to "trim" the output string prior to outputting it.
BTB, the Cactid 0.8.6f-g thingy was a mistake by the packager != me. These things happen from time to time.
TheWitness
True understanding begins only when we realize how little we truly understand...
I specifically trimmed dangling spaces and \n from the scripts.
Is cactid 0.86g really supposed to read "0.86f" when requesting a version string? As stated previously, the tarball was named "cacti-cactid-0.8.6g.tar.gz", and came fromthe cactid download pg: http://www.cacti.net/downloads/cactid/c ... .6g.tar.gz.