Wildcards in service escalations query

Mohit Chawla mohit.chawla.binary at gmail.com
Wed Jul 6 18:18:35 CEST 2011


Hi,

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Paul M. Dubuc <work at paul.dubuc.org> wrote:

> I agree.  It would be nice if the serviceescalation definition would
> automatically exclude hosts which don't have services specified by its
> service_description.  Instead of adding all those host names there, you
> could use a host group as I described here:
>
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27615125
>
> It's a little more work initially, but it's easier to maintain, I think.
>  You won't have to remember to change the escalation every time you add a
> host. It's easier to include a host in the hostgroup you use for the
> escalation when you define the host.
>

Even then maintaining entries in that hostgroup would be
cumbersome/error-prone. Anyway, I was fortunate enough to only have
two problematic hosts, for which I added simple ping checks, and now
using the * wildcard. :)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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





More information about the Users mailing list