Network filesystem - overall status and usage (e.g. NFS) is not creating any new service as documented

Hi Team,

We have a requirement to monitor the usage of Various NFS Mounts on a server. default NFS mount check only monitor when the mount point is active. And if the mount is not active more one hour, check will automatically go into UNKN state. So we have gone through the documentation and created a rule “Network filesystem - overall status and usage (e.g. NFS)”. However, it is not created a new service for monitoring.

https://checkmk.com/cms_check_nfsmounts.html
Checkmk Verision: 1.6.0p11

can someone please guide me to configure this rule.

Thanks in advance.

Best Regards,
Rajesh

For a network filesystem it would be best to monitor the space on the machine exporting this filesystem.
There it is a normal local filesystem. What exactly do you mean with

Pay attention that you use the rule “Network filesystem - overall status and usage (e.g. NFS)” from inside the “Manual Checks”.
The rules should look like

Hi Andreas,
Thank you so much for the response.
we even tried the manual check that is suggested. since the mount point is not active, check was showing UNKN.


please do suggest if there is a way to check usage though the mount is not active .

Thanks & Regards,
Rajesh

Like i said before the usage should be checked at the server who is exporting this mount.
How would you check the usage if the mount is not active on the target?

Hi Andreas,
Thanks for the response. I’m Praveen, Rajesh’s Teammate.
Let me put the scenario in this way.
Actually we have some Network Shared path which need to be monitored like space usage, inodes and other parameters.
This can be achieved by the default NFS mount check that we get it from the inbuilt one’s.
The problem with this default check is that it will be active only if the user is logged in. If not it will go to unknown state. But at the backend the path is active.

So our plan here is to have a dummy server and monitor these network paths so that it will independent of user login.

Please let us know if there is any confusion in this.