> One trouble in creating one group per host/service is the shear number of > groups you end up with.
It is not difficult to generate a mon.cf file automaticaly with a list of hosts to be splitted, no ? > If you specify 'alertafter 2 30m', service b should not > alert after one failure just because service a failed one time 15 minutes > ago. But service b does not since services are completely independant with their alerts. Did I misunderstand your remark ? > Because of these, I would have to agree with the original poster that > failures should be tracked at the service/host level, and not the group > level. alertafter 2 30m 1round) A server f1 fails 1 time => no alert 2round) A server f2 fails 1 time => alert In that case you'd prefer no alert, that's it ? Since mon doesn't know what a host is, you have to write another tool, or use separate groups. -- Au revoir, 33 (0) 2 99 78 62 49 Gilles Lamiral. France, L'Hermitage (35590) 33 (0) 6 20 79 76 06 http://www.sri.ucl.ac.be/SRI/frfc/rfc1855.fr.html _______________________________________________ mon mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
