You still would have unexpected behaviour. I think in this case, it is preferred to have expected behaviour rather than doing bullshit magic and voodoo in the background.
Adam.
Sent from BlueMail
On 20 May 2016, 20:44, at 20:44, Tom Laermans tom.laermans@powersource.cx wrote:
.. or instilling intelligence into the poller to run polls based on "top level" (least amount of parent devices in tree) ... which is not impossible but definitely fiddly :-)
On 20/05/2016 21:42, Adam Armstrong wrote:
This is fiddly due to the way our poller runs as separated processes.
You'd not be able to reliably suppress alerts this way, without also delaying them by up to 5 minutes.
Adam.
Sent from BlueMail http://www.bluemail.me/r
On 20 May 2016, at 19:07, Spencer Ryan <sryan@arbor.net mailto:sryan@arbor.net> wrote:
I've asked about this before but how hard would it be for youguys
to implement alert dependencies? The easiest way I can think of doing it would be to simply let us set a "parent" device for anything, and if that device is offline don't send any alerts for downstream devices. For example we have a testlab that has no UPS/Generator powerthat
we monitor about 200 devices, when the building loses power weget
those 200 alarms about devices being offline, when in reality there is a single 6500 as the gateway, and if that switch is offline, i know the rest will be. We don't want to disable the offline alarms because we do want to know when individual devices drop out. Thanks! * Spencer Ryan* | Senior Systems Administrator | sryan@arbor.net <mailto:sryan@arbor.net> *Arbor Networks* +1.734.794.5033 (d) | +1.734.846.2053 (m) www.arbornetworks.com <http://www.arbornetworks.com/>
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list observium@observium.org http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium