Jump to content
C4 Forums | Control4

VegardK

c4Forums Member
  • Posts

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About VegardK

  • Birthday February 21

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Norway

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    Artius-Vegard

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

VegardK's Achievements

  1. The Generic is for use with KNX that do not have a driver. So if you need to use a Contact or Relay from KNX then the KNX Relay/Contact driver is correct. But if you need to use say KNX Scenes with datapoint 17/18 then the Generic can be the right way. The generic is just that generic with lots of opertunities to use many different yet "unsupported" datapoints from KNX, and you need to combine logging to find the right way.
  2. Best here is to use a knx switch/contact driver. Then add the KNX Address to a contact and then do a connection with a generic motion driver.
  3. Does anyone know if any of the AVR etc. drivers for Denon works with Denon RCD-N8?
  4. Any luck with this? I would want to send a ssh reboot command for a system from Control4.
  5. I have just used the SNMP from scanning, I have not used any custom MIBs. Is there any custom MIBs that I can use?
  6. This is true. Therefor trying to see if there is any others with information to what is normal for Control4. Cause this is different than other systems like you say.
  7. Thanks. Well then running on 6+ is not bad. But then this system should have more cores. But then again it would just pile up even more from my understanding. Peaking on 9 I don't think is good though. But If I look at the EA1 the CPU is averaging 5% with min 4% and max 42%. So thats not bad either and way within The memory on the other hand seems more worrisome. The Available memory is averaging 21%. Where the lowest 13% left and max at 24% left of memory. Is this something I should be more aware of? On screenshot of klaue2 it can seem that the EA5 there is having around 50% left... Its good to understand all this cause in terms of system capacity and planing, when should you go for a EA3 instead of EA1 and so on. When not basing it on how many sources you need. I like to use the EA3 a lot as it has PoE power, and I can then reboot it on the switch port if needed.
  8. Its never going to be easy. Its only gonna get harder. One need to use all the tools you can get in many ways. But its true what you say the problem lies with programming, bugs (lots of those around) and hardware failure. But then again a log would easily show if a you program something that would spam the system increasing its load. Or if you see some hardware responding worse over time. And as mentioned not doing a upgrade on a system, if you can see its close to limits, before those limits are dealt with.
  9. I guess only way to find out is over time. comparing systems. Comparing those that works well to those that does not work or fails. Anyway monitoring key aspects of systems I think is a good thing to do. Being early out and also in cases come before, telling the customer there is issues with their system and we are working on it. Before the customer even know there is a problem is good. Also most likely easier to tell a customer that you should upgrade your system cause you are on the limit with it. Not adding more features to a system that are on the edge, before doing some upgrades to the system.
  10. The tooling (PRTG) hasn't been set with any warnings yet, as I need to set them. And rule of thumb would be to have a system running less than 0,7 as the system then has space on the "road". And then set an error above 1.0 as there is no more space on the "road". And 1 core has 1 capacity so 4 cores would mean 4.0 would be max capacity. And in this case setting after this rule would go into a constant error. But as you say it doesn't really have to be bad. It might be Control4 has set so that it should always be on limit, and have processes waiting to do some "not that important" jobs. This is monitoring from 1 system only as well, I hope over time to gather this from several systems including EA3, EA5 etc. Once I have that I can be more sure of what is normal and not. I might take this to Control4 them self, and ask them what they say is ok an why.
  11. Yeah all is relative hence this thread Its the same guess as me that there is processes/drivers etc waiting to be processed. And that they don't need much capacity to run from the CPU, hence the low CPU %. I don't get monitoring from the the disk other than space, so cannot put that into the equation.
  12. In linux, average load is not the same as CPU utilization in %. CPU load in % is this. But that's how well each process is using the CPU not how many processes waiting to be processed. Take a look at this link about load: http://blog.scoutapp.com/articles/2009/07/31/understanding-load-averages So the 4 cores that the EA1 has the max load would be 4.0. But the system in my case is running 6+. Meaning processes is waiting in line to be handled. Then each process does not utilize the CPU that much, therefor low CPU utilization but high load. I guess this comes down to the fact that the system keep reading/writing a lot both from drivers and other systems, as well as reading all programming all the time.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.