warning level for v7? I think I've got him. 
 
EG1: I have a ping check which warns me when my pings take more than 5ms 
 
If I do a ping check and it returns no pings, then my server is down. 
If I do a ping check and it takes more then 7 milli-seconds then it is at 
"warning" level. 
 
EG2: I have a Hard Disk check which warns me when it's below 10% and considers 
it down at 5% or unreachable. 
 
If the check notices Hard Disk space below 10% an e-mail alert fires to warn 
me. 
If the check notices Hard Disk space below 5% an SMS alert fires to warn me. 
 
The Idea is that you're records will show that the server is now "DOWN" when 
the checks are failing but it will NOT report a server as "DOWN" when it's 
simply acting slow or something. 
 
My manager has me exporting details of the server checks to a SQL database and 
reporting to him the % of uptime for each server. 
 
I don't want him to think the server has had downtime when it was reporting 
slow ping times or low disk space, but I still want a warning if these levels 
are reached. 
 
Currently I can only achieve this by having one check to record downtime and a 
different check to record problematic system performance.  This is a pain for 
the fact I need to keep track of two checks and that my checks are taking more 
time because they have to perform the same check twice with the only difference 
being, how they act on the results. 
 
 
I guess the other solution (at least in my case) would be to simply allow 
alerts to be fired off based on information returned from the server, rather 
than simply wether the check indicates fails or succeeds. 
 

Charles Wilkinson
Systems Administrator
_________________________________
Supercheap Auto Pty Ltd

Mobile:  0403 502 467
Direct: (07) 3480 7750
Fax:    (07) 3205 8522
Email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
Website: www.supercheapauto.com (http://www.supercheapauto.com/)  

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

From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dirk 
Bulinckx
Sent: Wednesday, 22 November 2006 8:01 AM
To: Servers Alive Discussion List
Subject: RE: [SA-list] warning level for v7?



I think ... that OR I'm too tired to understand the mail OR it's not clear for 
me :-) 
 
Can you explain it differently?  Or maybe with some examples? 
 

Dirk Bulinckx.  

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

From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
Michael Shook
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 10:36 PM
To: Servers Alive Discussion List
Subject: [SA-list] warning level for v7?




        As you may remember the users have been kicking around a way to get SA 
to have warnings. Dirk has resisted because of the large number of changes to 
code that already revolve around having only 7 status levels. 

Possible solution: 
        Instead of a new level for the Status field, would it be possible to 
have an entirely new field? It would involve a duplicate "check is DOWN when: " 
section for each check, but it would then have it's own subset of levels and 
outputs. In my case, (and pehaps the majorities case) it would be enough for 
the warning level to be output to HTML and written to the interchange ( THIS 
MEANS NO ALERTS ). The warning level could mimic the current status level, 
except the final determination for UP/DOWN would be based on separate criteria. 
So, a status of MAINTENANCE ==> a warning of MAINTENANCE, but the warning could 
be DOWN while the status is still UP. In fact, the logic to determine the 
warning level would only have to be executed if the logic for status level 
evaluated to UP. If the logic for status level evaluated to anything else, then 
warning level would inherit that value automatically. 

What do you think? 

Michael D. Shook
Systems Analyst - Data Integration
Saddle Creek Corporation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
863 668 4477 (work)
863 860 4070 (cell)
863 665 1261 (fax)
www.saddlecrk.com (http://www.saddlecrk.com/) 



--------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is intended only for the use of the 
addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or agent 
of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution, or copying of the message is strictly prohibited.

To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to [email protected]
If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure 
that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list 
that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. 

To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to [email protected]
If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure 
that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list 
that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. 


The information in this Email is confidential and may be legally privileged. If 
you’ve received it in error, please contact us by return mail.
Information and opinions expressed, with the exception of this disclaimer, are 
not those of Supercheap Auto/BCF unless the sender has
express authority to give such statements or opinions and this is clearly 
stated within the message.

To unsubscribe send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE as subject to [email protected]
If you use auto-responders (like out-of-the-office messages), then make sure 
that they are not send to the list nor to the individual members of the list 
that send a message. Doing this will get you removed from the list. 

Reply via email to