query about passive checks and tactical overview

[Sloane, Robert Raymond]

> Enable active checks for the hosts/services but set their 
> check_period to none.
> 

This used to work, but now the check_period is enforced for the
freshness check.  Here is a patch that will change back to the old
behaviour.  This is for version 2.5.

*** checks.c~	Tue Jun 20 19:59:19 2006
--- checks.c	Thu Sep 28 10:27:04 2006
***************
*** 1731,1741 ****
  		/* skip services that are already being freshened */
  		if(temp_service->is_being_freshened==TRUE)
  			continue;
! 
  		/* see if the time is right... */
 
if(check_time_against_period(current_time,temp_service->check_period)==E
RROR)
  			continue;
! 
  		/* EXCEPTION */
  		/* don't check freshness of services without regular
check intervals if we're using auto-freshness threshold */
  		if(temp_service->check_interval==0 &&
temp_service->freshness_threshold==0)
--- 1731,1741 ----
  		/* skip services that are already being freshened */
  		if(temp_service->is_being_freshened==TRUE)
  			continue;
! #if 0
  		/* see if the time is right... */
 
if(check_time_against_period(current_time,temp_service->check_period)==E
RROR)
  			continue;
! #endif
  		/* EXCEPTION */
  		/* don't check freshness of services without regular
check intervals if we're using auto-freshness threshold */
  		if(temp_service->check_interval==0 &&
temp_service->freshness_threshold==0)

-- 
Bob Sloane, University of Kansas Computer Center, Lawrence, KS, 66045
Email:sloane at ku.edu http://www.ku.edu/home/sloane Phone:(785)864-0444
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagios-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net 
> [mailto:nagios-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf 
> Of Marc Powell
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:11 AM
> To: Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] query about passive checks and 
> tactical overview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nagios-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net 
> [mailto:nagios-users- 
> > bounces at lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Patrick Morris
> > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:02 PM
> > To: Manish Sapariya
> > Cc: nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [Nagios-users] query about passive checks and tactical 
> > overview
> > 
> > Hi Manish!
> > 
> > On Thu, 08 Mar 2007, Manish Sapariya wrote:
> > 
> > > I was expecting the tactical overview page to say that 
> there are no 
> > > active checks for service/host. However the tactical 
> overview page 
> > > says that for the active checks "X services disabled" and 
> "Y hosts 
> > > disabled" and shows them in red color.
> > 
> > This is normal.  I'm not sure if there's a way to get them 
> to not show 
> > red down there without some CGI hacking.
> 
> --
> Marc
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the 
> chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through 
> brief surveys-and earn cash 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when
reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null