Experimental support for parallel and iperf3 #2
Conversation
comment out corresponding (output=) line on 17 or 20
|
Hey matthewmdn, thanks for submitting to my humble little Github archive! Honestly, I haven't touched this script in ages, and unfortunately don't have the capacity at the moment to do any additional testing or make updates aside from very trivial ones. Hopefully folks interested in iperf3 will notice your pull request and go there. If you want me to surface this information better, let me know. Eventually if/when I get around to updating this in my own environment I'll do some testing and look at reviewing and integrating your enhancements. Again, thanks so much, I'm sure the insight you've shared will be very helpful to someone (and myself, when the time comes)! |
|
Yah, it's my first pull request. Your script is exactly what I was looking
for, but unfortunately I needed parallel. Even now, the results in prtg
don't look totally right. When I watch the console the output of the SUM
lines is much higher than the value logged in prtg. I don't understand
exactly what your doing to get that. When I get back from vacation in a
week, I'll have my colleague look and help me figure it out. I'll update my
pull request when I can verify it works.
Thanks for sharing this! Much better than starting from scratch.
*Matthew Mellor*
LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/pub/matthew-mellor/16/469/640/>
*760.301.6365*
…On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 4:49 PM, rkagerer ***@***.***> wrote:
Hey matthewmdn, thanks for submitting to my humble little Github archive!
Honestly, I haven't touched this script in ages, and unfortunately don't
have the capacity at the moment to do any additional testing or make
updates aside from very trivial ones.
Hopefully folks interested in iperf3 will notice your pull request and go
there. If you want me to surface this information better, let me know.
Eventually if/when I get around to updating this in my own environment
I'll do some testing and look at reviewing and integrating your
enhancements.
Again, thanks so much!
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#2 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGQS9OGuPetMwSprOh_x19QuHpAsdUggks5skFL2gaJpZM4PdGHc>
.
|
|
PRTG Network Monitor 17.3.32.2478+ the information is not displayed, although the script is running and the check is in progress. |
|
PRTG answer: Failed to read paessh command from shell (1). Reason: read_paessh timeout |
3 participants
comment out corresponding (output=) line on 17 or 20
I'm testing this in our environment. Manual iperf testing showed that I needed to use at least 10 parallel tests for over 30-40 seconds to get a max bandwidth expected.
The modifications I made to the grep line seemed to work as it only grabs the SUM lines of the iperf output. Not 100% confident in the tests just yet. Maybe someone can confirm my changes.