Wildcards in service escalations query

[Paul M. Dubuc]

Mohit Chawla wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If we have:
>
> define serviceescalation {
>      host_name                  *
>      service_description    *
>      ...
> }
>
> , then, if there is no service associated with a host, this definition
> will be regarded invalid. But what about if a particular service is
> not associated with any host ? Will it fail in that case as well ? I
> was able to find hosts which don't have any services defined, and I
> used:
> define serviceescalation {
>      host_name                      *, !foo.com, !bar.com
>      service_description        *
>      ....
> }
> , where foo and bar are the hosts with no services defined. But I
> still get 'could not expand services ....' error on this escalation
> definition.
>
> Any clues ?

As long as any hosts that match the host_name directive have no services 
defined, you will get this error.  The escalation apparently wants to have 
host/service pairs.  It's a service escalation and all services must be 
assigned to a host.  It doesn't automatically discard hosts that have no 
services.  To get around this you can use a hostgroup that contains only hosts 
with services assigned.  I've given an example here: 
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27615125

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security 
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes 
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
_______________________________________________
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