AW: Re: AW: Re: AW: Re: [rt-users] RT bottlenecks

Ham MI-ID, Torsten Brumm torsten.brumm at Kuehne-Nagel.com
Fri Sep 28 15:37:06 EDT 2007


Ok,

The sql perf is fine, but the www perf, what do you monitor exactly? The apache stats? This will bring you back only the apache information, not how rt is working.

We do at this moment a login and ticket opening with wget and graph this in cacti, but this is not the correct result we get, because we have the time for login and open the ticket, a summary of two "user actions"

I'm searchin for a way to monitor this without the login process.

Torsten

-----Original Message-----
From: Kobus Bensch NF <kbensch at fullnet.co.uk>
To: Ham MI-ID, Torsten Brumm
CC: rfh at pipex.net <rfh at pipex.net>; theillien at yahoo.com <theillien at yahoo.com>; rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com <rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com>
Sent: Fri Sep 28 21:33:46 2007
Subject: Re: AW: Re: AW: Re: [rt-users] RT bottlenecks

Well it depends on what you want to monitor

we monitor the sql perf
www perf
graph this and so on

let me know specifics and i can try and help

Ham MI-ID, Torsten Brumm wrote: 

	Yes we too, how do you do this exactly?
	
	Torsten
	
	-----Original Message-----
	From: Kobus Bensch NF <kbensch at fullnet.co.uk> <mailto:kbensch at fullnet.co.uk> 
	To: Ham MI-ID, Torsten Brumm
	CC: rfh at pipex.net <rfh at pipex.net> <mailto:rfh at pipex.net> ; theillien at yahoo.com <theillien at yahoo.com> <mailto:theillien at yahoo.com> ; rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com <rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com> <mailto:rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com> 
	Sent: Fri Sep 28 21:29:06 2007
	Subject: Re: AW: Re: [rt-users] RT bottlenecks
	
	Hi
	
	I use Nagios and Cacti to monitor RT and the box
	
	Ham MI-ID, Torsten Brumm wrote:
	
	        Hi matthew,
	        Me too, if you have something, pls share.
	       
	        Does anyone have something to cleanly monitor the rt performance? Response times etc? We are using a scrip at this moment which does a wget and this pain in the ass.
	       
	        Any idea is welcome
	       
	        Torsten
	       
	        -----Original Message-----
	        From: rt-users-bounces at lists.bestpractical.com <rt-users-bounces at lists.bestpractical.com> <mailto:rt-users-bounces at lists.bestpractical.com>  <mailto:rt-users-bounces at lists.bestpractical.com>
	        To: Mathew <theillien at yahoo.com> <mailto:theillien at yahoo.com>  <mailto:theillien at yahoo.com>
	        CC: rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com <rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com> <mailto:rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com>  <mailto:rt-users at lists.bestpractical.com>
	        Sent: Fri Sep 28 17:51:30 2007
	        Subject: Re: [rt-users] RT bottlenecks
	       
	        Matthew;
	        If you have any benchmarking techniques , can you share them please I'll
	        be interested in how to monitor RT activities.
	        Regards;
	        Roy
	       
	        Mathew wrote:
	        > Version 3.6.1 actually.  I'll give it a try though and see what happens.
	        >  I know there is a benchmarking method that was explained in the RT
	        > training I attended so I'll look in my documentation and see what I find
	        > for that.
	        >
	        > Keep up with my goings on at http://theillien.blogspot.com
	        >
	        > Roy El-Hames wrote:
	        > 
	        >> Matthew;
	        >> What version of RT are you using?
	        >> With > 3.6.1, I noticed slowness with transaction custom fields queries,
	        >> if you do not use them try and comment out the following lines from
	        >> html/Ticket/Elements/ShowTransaction
	        >>
	        >> %# if ($Transaction->CustomFieldValues->Count) {
	        >> %#      <& /Elements/ShowCustomFields, Object => $Transaction &>
	        >> %#}
	        >>
	        >> You may find tickets display quicker --but again do this if you do not
	        >> use Transaction CF's--
	        >>
	        >> Regards;
	        >> Roy
	        >>
	        >> Mathew wrote:
	        >>   
	        >>> I've been informed that some are beginning to complain about the speed
	        >>> of RT when it comes to loading tickets that contain attachments.  This
	        >>> has led to the question of distributed computing in the way of load
	        >>> balancing.  I'd like to avoid moving in this direction with RT as we
	        >>> don't have the need for it.  Our user base is small as is our ticket
	        >>> count.
	        >>>
	        >>> It would seem that most of the bottleneck comes from actually loading
	        >>> the page.  I've found that tickets with numerous transactions (exact
	        >>> number not known) tend to be slow to load even without attachments.
	        >>>
	        >>> How should I go about pinpointing the bottleneck so I can find a
	        >>> solution that won't require a major tech refresh?
	        >>>
	        >>>
	        >>> Mathew
	        >>> 
	        >>>     
	        >>   
	        >
	        > 
	       
	        _______________________________________________
	        http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
	       
	        Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
	        Commercial support: sales at bestpractical.com
	       
	       
	        Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
	        Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
	       
	
	       
	       
	________________________________
	
	
	        _______________________________________________
	        http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
	       
	        Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
	        Commercial support: sales at bestpractical.com
	       
	       
	        Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
	        Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
	
	

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-users/attachments/20070928/6e48fedd/attachment.html>


More information about the rt-users mailing list