On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Andreas Ericsson <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/17/2011 11:34 AM, Max Schubert wrote: >> Andreas, >> >> How does this differ functionality from the current ability to >> describe dependencies with servicedependency? Is it just easier to >> define (I agree that would be a win) >> > > It's just easier to describe, and it ties in nicely with different > additions to the configuration syntax being planned. It does have > some limitations, but in 99.5% of all dependencies I've seen, it > matches the usecase people put dependencies to so it should be quite > a nice win anyway.
I agree - the current syntax is very flexible but understanding how to implement it properly for some users results in a very painful learning curve. Any plans to detatch notification attributes from service / host definitions in 4.x and make them their own top-level configuration class like escalations to make it easier to scale notification definitions for large projects? - Max ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know. Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay _______________________________________________ Nagios-users mailing list [email protected] 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
