what does 'Report Period' field do in Availability report (2.x) ?

[Michael Medin]

Stanley Hopcroft wrote:

>Dear Folks,
>
>Nag 2.x seems to have introduced a new field in the availability report 
>CGI panel (http://your_nag/nagios/cgi-bin/avail.cgi?... the third panel
>that looks like 
>
>Service Availability Report                     
>   Last Updated: Mon May 16 14:27:55 EST 2005
>   Nagios - www.nagios.org
>   Logged in as anwsmh
> 
>                                                Step 3: Select Report 
>Options
> 
>     Report Period:                             [Last 7 
>Days_____________]
>     If Custom Report Period...
>     Start Date (Inclusive):                    [May______] 1_ 2005
>     End Date (Inclusive):                      [May______] 16 2005
>     Report time Period:                        [None___________]
>                         Assume Initial States: [Yes]
>                        Assume State Retention: [Yes]
>         Assume States During Program Downtime: [Yes]
>                           Include Soft States: [No_]
>                   First Assumed Service State: [Unspecified_____]
>ktracked Archives (To Scan For Initial States): 1_
>                                                Create Availability 
>Report!
>)
>
>The new field is 'Report Period' and allows the selection of one of the 
>configured timeperiods (24x7, none, workhours etc).
>  
>

I think its the field I added, if so it calculates the avaliblility 
based on the selected timeperiod. The main reson for adding this is that 
OUR SLA only covers officehours but we still want to monitor 24x7.

>What does this 'Report Period' field do ?
>  
>
Filters the collected data based on a timeperiod.

>Does it mean that availability is only computed for that time period ?
>
>(so that availability for the none time period is always 100% and 
>         availability for the 24x7 time period is always the sum of
>          the down times/reporting interval * 100).
>
>In other words, that downtime falling outside the time period is ignored 
>?
>  
>
Yeap, thats the idea anyways...

>If so, this is a great adddition and makes reporting for SLAs feasable.
>  
>
Yeap, thats why I added it :)

// Michael Medin

>Yours sincerely.
>
>
>                                                   
>
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>--
>This message contains privileged and confidential information only 
>for use by the intended recipient.  If you are not the intended 
>recipient of this message, you must not disseminate, copy or use 
>it in any manner.  If you have received this message in error, 
>please advise the sender by reply e-mail.  Please ensure all 
>e-mail attachments are scanned for viruses prior to opening or 
>using.
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.monitoring-lists.org/archive/users/attachments/20050516/54071db9/attachment.html>