On Nov 1, 2006, at 6:17 PM, Daniel Cid wrote:
>
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> Thanks for the report. It's nice to see that ossec is handling this
> large number
> of agents. One think you can change is the maximum number of events
> stored
> in memory for correlation. By default it is 1024, but for your large
> install you can
> increase it to 5096 or something larger. Just set the "memory_size"
> option in
> the "global" section to the value you want. Most of the times I
> increase it to
> 5096 :)
Thanks, I'm trying that right now.
>
> Btw, how many events and alerts per second do you have? (Analysisd
> store
> them hourly)... Just curious..
It looks like I averaged 44 events/sec yesterday. I did zgrep -c
^2006 ossec-alerts-01.log.gz and divide that by 86400....not sure if
there's a better way.
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Daniel B. Cid
> dcid ( at ) ossec.net
>
> On 11/1/06, Jeremy Hanmer <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Oct 30, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Daniel Cid wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Hi Jeremy,
>> >
>> >
>> > *btw, let us know how ossec behaves with that large number of
>> agents.
>> > The maximum
>> > I tested with was 74 agents.
>>
>> I've had everything running since Sunday with all 420 agents and
>> everything's looking good. As far as performance goes, the box is a
>> dual-core Opteron 165 with 2GB of RAM. During the busiest time of
>> the day, ossec-analysisd averages about 50% CPU with less than 2MB of
>> RAM used and ossec-remoted averages about 5% CPU with about 3MB of
>> RAM usage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > --
>> > Daniel B. Cid
>> > dcid ( at ) ossec.net
>> >
>> > On 10/30/06, Jeremy Hanmer <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I've got a fairly large ossec installation that I've just set up
>> >> (currently 420 agents with 1 central server) and I hit a
>> problem with
>> >> MAX_AGENTS. With more than 256 agents, ossec-remoted
>> segfaults. I
>> >> had to dig through the code to figure out what to raise since
>> nothing
>> >> gets logged when it crashes. I tried to add some error
>> handling, but
>> >> it looks like a lot of places would need checks and I'm not quite
>> >> comfortable with that just yet.
>> >>
>>
>>