[PATCH] Distinguish between warning and critical notifications

[Gius, Mark]

I am resurrecting this thread at the request of Andreas Ericsson.  This quote from another thread.

Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> Would this be one adding a new variable to the object structs? If so, I'm not surprised it 
> didn't get through, since that would break the ABI for all modules and thus require a minor 
> version bump as well as a re-compile of all running modules.

That would explain why it was easier for us to transition; I don't think we're using any modules that scrape internal Nagios data (with the exception of the CGIs).

-Gius

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gius, Mark
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 5:33 PM
> To: Nagios Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Nagios-devel] [PATCH] Distinguish between warning and
> critical notifications
> 
> Mark Gius wrote:
> > Hendrik Baecker wrote:
> >
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> Am 18.11.09 01:02, schrieb Mark Gius:
> >>
> >>
> >>> The patch adds 4 configuration directives to service escalations
> >>> definitions:
> >>>
> >>>    first_warning_notification #
> >>>    last_warning_notification #
> >>>    first_critical_notification #
> >>>    last_critical_notification #
> >>>
> >>> Behavior is identical to (first|last)_notification, except that
> they
> >>> check against the count of warning/critical notifications instead
> of
> >>> the number of total notifications.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I really like this but what about unknown state notifications which
> >> might be used?
> >>
> >>
> > I thought of unknowns right after I sent the patch.  We don't really
> > use them in our deployment, so I wasn't thinking about them during
> > implementation.  It's easy enough to add.
> >
> >> What about hostescalations? Would you patch them too?
> >>
> >>
> > I was going to question the usefulness of this, but they can be both
> > "down" and "unreachable."  I'll get an updated patch up sometime next
> week.
> >
> And now I'm done.  I've done some sanity checks on this (retention, cgi
> behavior, notification behavior, objects.cache).  I'm running this code
> on our testing instance now, and I'll report back if something awful
> happens.
> 
> The Patch adds the following directives to host escalations
> 
>     first_down_notification #
>     last_down_notification #
>     first_unreachable_notification #
>     last_unreachable_notification #
> 
> Behavior is identical to (first_last)_notification, except that they
> check against the count of down/unreachable notifications instead of
> the total.
> 
> I've also added directives to service escalations to handle unknown
> states
> 
>     first_unknown_notification #
>     last_unknown_notification #
> 
> -Gius

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev