You made me revisit the man pages. Without reading Vernon's link I think Xymon is correct and 'top' is incorrect. Both swap -s and swap -l are correct. I did already know Solaris does some magic foot work with real memory when calculating swap which may be in Vernon's article but I think I can explain the numbers in the AM. Time for sleep before the babies wake up.
~David
From: Jeremy Laidman [mailto:jlaidman at rebel-it.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:58 PM To: Gore, David W (David) Cc: xymon at xymon.com Subject: Re: [Xymon] Solaris 10 swap not showing on memory alert correctly?
On 27 June 2013 02:38, Gore, David W (David) <david.gore at verizon.com<mailto:david.gore at verizon.com>> wrote: Where is it getting the 106M number? Anyone else seen this on Solaris?
Yes, same here. It gets the number from the [swaplist] section (from swap -l) of your client message, in preference to the [swap] section (from swap -s). [Reference: xymond/client/solaris.c, in function handle_solaris_client()]
So the real question is, why does "swap -s" and "swap -l" give different results? The man page for swap indicates that "swap -s" includes swap space in the form of physical memory (in addition to swap partitions and files). Physical memory used for swap?! Huh!? I really don't know how the Solaris memory management works!
J