| To: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: process pmda |
| From: | Chandana De Silva <chandana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Sep 2014 14:40:00 +1000 |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <mailman.787.1411963858.4393.pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <mailman.787.1411963858.4393.pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | chandana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Ah, that explains it. It had an easy way of keeping track of daemons, which could be leveraged for into a simple pmie check. Ok, we will stick to doing it the hard way via counting on the proc pmda. Thanks On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 23:10 -0500, pcp-request@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > The _process_ pmda has not been built/packaged for some time, as this > comment in the source explains ... > > # This PMDA is only valid on platforms with a procfs > # It is also superceded by the cgroup functionality on Linux > # thus has not been built for some time, for reference only. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [pcp] FW: pmatop failing in qa, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | pcp updates - mostly QA for changes to config files ownership, Ken McDonell |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [pcp] process pmda, Ken McDonell |
| Next by Thread: | pcp updates - mostly QA for changes to config files ownership, Ken McDonell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |