Re: snmptrap performance

Alfredo Dimaunahan wrote:
> Regarding the "snmptrap" (not snmptrapd, right?) startup time, should we consider this a bug? Or will it be improved in next versions? I also tried it in net-snmp version 5.1.2 and same behavior was noticed.

No, this isn't a bug. There's significant startup "cost" by nature.
snmptrap hasn't been designed to be a bulk notification sender.
Some of the startup time (i.e. for MIB loading) could potentially be
reduced by proper configuration, though. YMMV.


+Thomas

--
Thomas Anders (thomas.anders at blue-cable.de)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?p...rge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-users mailing list
Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/...net-snmp-users