FWIW, I'd really like to see "MAINTENANCE until hh:mm"  or "MAINTENANCE for
..Minutes/hours" as a feature and would use it regularly. If it could be
extended to include a "MAINTENANCE from dd/mm/yy hh:mm to dd/mm/yy hh:mm"
to cope with scheduled system outages then that would be ideal.

I regularly have problems with system checks being put into Maintenance and
then engineers forgetting to take them out. In fact, it happened again last
night and sure enough, the system crashed this morning and we didn't know
until users reported the problem.

Cheers,
Anthony



                                                                           
             "Dirk Bulinckx"                                               
             <[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                             
             u>                                                         To 
             Sent by:                  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>               
             [EMAIL PROTECTED]                                          cc 
             stone.nu                                                      
                                                                   Subject 
                                       RE: [SA-list] Possible Future       
             30/06/2004 06:13          Feature Request                     
             PM                                                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
             Please respond to                                             
             [EMAIL PROTECTED]                                             
                    nu                                                     
                                                                           
                                                                           




More usefull could be a "MAINTENANCE until hh:mm"  or "MAINTENANCE for ..
Minutes/hours"
I think this was already mentioned on the list before and it's something
that is on the "to look at" list... (very different from the TODO list :-))


Dirk.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Of Carroll, Andy
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 9:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Possible Future Feature Request

Dirk,

I don't believe this 'feature' would be applicable for a check that you
have
running 24x7.

I don't see that there is a requirement to put a 24x7 type of check into a
MAINTENANCE until next check cycle mode.

I have various extracts / reports that get created daily that I need to
know
whether they ran successfully or not, which I have set up Servers Alive
checks to monitor for. If these extracts / reports have failed the
situation
needs attention but I do not need to know until tomorrow morning if these
extracts / reports have failed again or not.

I have other checks that check for the existence of certain files that are
delivered to the system at different times of the day and checks on our
databases that once they have been noted to be in a DOWN condition, would
not need to be alerted via Servers Alive again until next scheduled check
cycle as the situation causing the down condition is being dealt with.

I suppose the requirement is therefore to have a status that indicates that
the check DOWN condition has been noted and is being acted on by support
personnel and the situation which caused the down condition is being dealt
with, whilst still going into "MAINTENANCE due to checking schedule of
entry" and 'Live' at the next scheduled time, i.e. the following day,
therefore maintaining the check with minimal manual intervention.

Andy



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
Sent: 30 June 2004 08:20
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [SA-list] Possible Future Feature Request


And how would that be handled then with a schedule to check all the time?
That means that you can put the host into maintenance for more then a
couple
of seconds/minutes....


Dirk.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
Of Carroll, Andy
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 8:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SA-list] Possible Future Feature Request

Dirk / Forum members,

There are a number of early system morning checks and late evening system
checks that we perform daily, and I have a number of Servers Alive checks
that I have set up to alert me of various situations that may be only
relevant for a short period during these times each day.

I have set up these checks, via their schedules, to only check for 1 hour
during the relevant period that we are performing these early morning and
late evening checks.

This causes me some difficulties occasionally as it is not always possible
to complete these system checks within the scheduled time that the Servers
Alive checks are 'Live', which means that occasionally I have to manually
check for the conditions that I have set the Servers Alive checks to
monitor
for.

Also some of these checks fail, which is a valid condition and we deal with
the problem, but once we have noted this we do not want this DOWN condition
to continue to alert for the rest of it's scheduled check time and report a
DOWN condition which would show on our HTML Frontend which is used by
various other departments, including helpdesk and senior management, but we
don't want to manually put the check on MAINTENANCE as there is always the
possibility that we would forget to make the check 'Live' again before the
next scheduled check time.

Would it be possible to have an option to put a check into MAINTENANCE mode
until the next scheduled check time as defined in the check's schedule tab?
creating a sort of "DOWN condition noted mode/status" which takes the check
out of the check cycle until the next scheduled period starts.

This would allow us to extend the schedule checking period without the
concern of down conditions being reported for longer than operationally
necessary.

Does anyone else see the benefit of this as an option? or even see what I
am
trying to explain.....

Regards,

Andy

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

[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
With the following in the body of the message:
   unsubscribe SAlive




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

[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
With the following in the body of the message:
   unsubscribe SAlive

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

[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
With the following in the body of the message:
   unsubscribe SAlive




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

[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

To unsubscribe from a list, send a mail message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
With the following in the body of the message:
   unsubscribe SAlive




The information contained in this email message and any attachment is for
intended recipients only.  It may contain confidential, privileged or
copyright material.  If you receive this email in error please delete it
and any attachments and notify the sender immediately by reply email.  Any
use, reading, copying, distributing or disclosure of the information in
this email is strictly prohibited if you are not the intended recipient.

Any views expressed in this email are not necessarily those of TNT.  TNT
does not warrant that this email is free from viruses or other defects.
TNT is not liable for loss, damage or other consequences that may arise
from opening or using this email or any attachments.

âTNTâ means TNT Australia Pty Limited, its related companies and
subsidiaries and includes  McPhee Transport Pty Ltd, Riteway Transport Pty
Limited, TNT Materials Handling Pty Ltd and TNT Logistics (Australia) Pty
Limited.

Reply via email to