Does alert re-escalate when text of alert changes?

[Jonathan Kamens]

I don't think anyone responded to the message below.  I'm hoping that
somebody can shed some light on this so I don't have to go read the
source code to find a definitive answer.  If anybody can help, it would
be much appreciated.

Thanks,

  Jonathan Kamens

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Kamens 
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:00 AM
To: nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Does alert re-escalate when text of alert changes?

Greetings,

We manage a bunch of servers using passive NSCA alerts, many of which
are custom alerts we wrote ourselves, that spool to a central Nagios
server.

One of these alerts concerns the status of the RAID array on the
servers.  When something disrupts the array and it needs to rebuild, the
alert goes into WARNING state, and the text that follows the WARNING
shows (among other things) the percentage done that the rebuild is.

It seems that every time that percentage increases and our passive alert
script spools a message with the new percentage in it (but the same
status, WARNING, as the old message), the central Nagios server treats
this as a new alert and follows the configured escalation path over
again.

I'm wondering (a) am I interpreting this correctly, i.e., am I correct
that this is why this alert keeps getting escalated over and over, and
(b) is there any way, short of removing the percentage from the alert
text so that the message is static, of preventing the repeated
escalation?

Thanks,

  Jonathan Kamens




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
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