HealthService restarts – still a challenge in OpsMgr 2012.

<!--[if lt IE 9]>


Comments (13)
  1. Kevin Holman says:

    @Stooney –

    Not sure I understand your question – if you read my blog post above – I *AM* recommending these as system wide changes and picture the values I prefer as a base. No – management servers should not be changed which is why I choose the Agent class to modify.
    Exchange and Hyper-V servers might need even higher values since they host so many objects… and you can add another override for those scoped to a group, which will win in conflict since group is more specific than class.

    1. It would be nice to know what the suggested maximum value is for these treshold. Even after these changes we still have the problem.

      1. Kevin Holman says:

        There is no maximum value.

        You establish a baseline that is more realistic.

        Next, you determine the systems for which the baseline is not acceptable (via the alerts created by these overrides)

        Next, you determine WHY those agents are need more memory or handles (perhaps they discover a huge number of objects like SQL, Exchange, or Lync) or perhaps they have a massive amount of memory, so the .NET memory garbage collection never runs, etc…

        Then – you determine if you should just ignore those agents, (assuming they are not restarting very often), or disable the monitoring for these as the SCOM agent is not causing any harm, or determine if they just need a much higher threshold.

        There are always edge cases, but these are outliers, and not the norm.

  2. Krish says:

    Hope you are doing good.

    I am facing the above problem with my management servers and the health state of the servers are in critical because of this alert.
    Steps taken for this alert.

    Applied override for the classes management server, management server agent.

    Parameter name – Agent performance monitor type (Consecutive Samples) – Threshold – default value – 314572800 Effective Value – 1610612736.

    After changing the threshold values also the state change is happening. Could you please help me to fix this issue.

  3. stooney says:

    Glad I landed on this post, we are seeing a wide range of servers affected by this issue, particularly with Exchange and Hyper-V. After reading the post, I am wondering if it would be safe/recommended to implement a system wide change with these values
    (600MB and 15000 handles) to a 2,000 server environment? If so, should Management server values be modified as well? Thank you

  4. stooney says:

    Yes, it does answer my question. Thank very much. I just wanted some assurance since your recommended values are such a jump from the defaults. It just makes me wonder why they are not the defaults to start with.

  5. lucy says:

    Great post from your hands again. I loved the complete article.
    By the way nice writing style you have. I never felt like boring while reading this article.

    I will come back & read all your posts soon. Regards, Lucy.

  6. Tommy says:

    Hi Kevin,

    Since SCOM 2012 R2 U3 the Health Service Handle Count Threshold for Management Server (Agent) has been changed;
    The update threshold for monitor "Health Service Handle Count Threshold" is reset to 30,000. You can see this issue in the environment, and the Health Service Handle Count Threshold monitor is listed in the critical state.

    However, Monitoring Host Handle Count Threshold is still set to 10.000. Whilst you advise to increase the threshold for Agents to 15.000, how about Management Server (Agent)?

    Currently i have:

    Health Service Handle Count Threshold
    Management Server – 30.000 (default since UR3)
    Management Server Agent – 30.000 (default since UR3)
    Agent – Severity: Information, Generates Alerts: True, Auto-Resolve Alert: False, Threshold: 15.000

    Monitoring Host Handle Count Threshold
    Management Server – 10.000 (default)
    Management Server Agent – 10.000 (default)
    Agent – Severity: Information, Generates Alerts: True, Auto-Resolve Alert: False, Threshold: 15.000

  7. Tommy says:

    Also, in addition to Krish, We increased the value for management server (agent) to 4294967296 (bytes) because our health services on management servers easily consume 3G or more.

    1. rob1974 says:

      I don’t like the auto resolve, all though i understand the reason.

      What i’ve done is create a view for “information” alerts with the Microsoft.SystemCenter.Agent.% name. The view is sorted on “created” and grouped on “source”. This gives an overview per agent

  8. Jason says:

    Beware the SCCM current branch (1610) agent install if you use SCCM and SCOM in your environment.
    I don’t install .NET Framework willy nilly on my servers (knowing full well the impact) but the SCCM current branch has a pre-req of NET Framework 4.5 and if that is not installed it will install NET Framework 4.5.2, which can leak memory.
    Ever since our SCCM guy updated to current branch (several weeks ago) my SCOM management servers leaked memory like a sieve. I didn’t have time to look at it several weeks ago so I just added more memory (virtuals) and then increased the private bytes threshold, which simply kicked the ball down the road.
    The issue might be related Issue 14 here,-4.5.1,-and-4.5-in-windows
    I installed NET Framework 4.6.2 on my management servers which has an updated garbage collector (and maybe also no issue 14 bug). Memory usage is stable now on the management servers though I am yet to determine how badly the Agents are affected.

    You would think if 1610 (release last Nov) was going to mandate 4.5 or above if it had to install a version it would have installed a NET Framework from 2016 and not one from 2014.

  9. Hello Kevin,

    Good Day!!
    What if we increase the handle count threshold to 60,000?? As we are still facing this issue on many of our agents..
    Or is there any alternative to resolve this issue???
    Can you please help on the same!!

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content