So I was just thinking about this more generically, and was thinking, how about 
a new attribute to the object called something like “display” and could have it 
default to 1 (on) but you could set it to off in the config file to basically 
“hide” any objects that you just didn’t want to be displayed but still 
scheduled, checked, etc?  I know this would change the struct so maybe someone 
has a better idea how to accomplish same thing ?

Dan

On Jan 9, 2014, at 1:46 PM, Daniel Wittenberg <[email protected]> wrote:

> Well, sort of.  One example that I have used a lot over the years is CPU 
> stats, so tracking Idle/IO/User/System.  I want the metrics collected, but 
> I’m not going to ever generate an alert. Another thing that I’m seeing is a 
> trend to anomaly detection, so in that case we wouldn’t be doing the alerting 
> but just collecting the stats and sending it off for something else to 
> determine if it’s an alert.  That make more sense?
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> On Jan 8, 2014, at 3:48 AM, Robin Sonefors <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On 2014-01-07 06:44, Daniel Wittenberg wrote:
>>> Another nifty feature I think would be nice to have is a “performance” 
>>> resource, so one that
>>> just collects metrics and nothing more.  So I know you can do that now by 
>>> just making it show
>>> ‘OK’ but sometimes I just want it to quietly collect perf data and nothing 
>>> more.  I’m guessing
>>> I’m probably the only weird one who wants something like that though…
>> 
>> How should that relate to other services and/or hosts? As in, is there a 
>> context where you want the performance available?
>> 
>> It might be useful to be able to map extra performance checks for a 
>> host/service, and in a UI merge that information with the information 
>> retrieved from the regular host/service check - for example, you want your 
>> RAM to be used, goshdarnit, but you'd still like it to be graphed with the 
>> other services on the host. Do I understand you correctly?
> 

Reply via email to