Whew! After reading all of the posts I think I figured out something...
Let me through out a for instance...
I have a ping check for host "joe"
"joe" is a windows system so...
I have the following dependant checks:
Perfmon %CPU _Total
Diskspace Check C:
Diskspace Check D:
Perfmon Network Load
... etc ...
Do I configure the checks to all use the same hostid? (meaning they don't
each get a unique value.)
And will that screw up the RRD graphing if they are the same?
Or do I have to give each check a distinct hostid for the RRD graphing?
I think there is a really good chance my setup is totally screwed up at
the moment!!! :/
Rob
> Not yet :-)
> That's an "extension" I've been thinking about...
>
>
>
> Dirk Bulinckx.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Michael Shook
> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 5:51 PM
> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
> Subject: RE: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>
> Adding it to the wizard would certainly be good Idea, but I don't have
> each
> host with it's own group.
>
> Just one big group and then the checks and dependecies under them.
>
> Hmmmmm, so I should look at creating a group for each physical machine?
>
> Dang! I know, I use the IP address for the host name. Can I use the wizard
> to match "All Hosts named - 123.123.123.123 = hostid of 12 ?
>
> Michael D. Shook
> Technical Analyst
> Saddle Creek Corporation
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 863 668 4477 (work)
> 863 860 4070 (cell)
> 863 665 1261 (fax)
> www.saddlecrk.com
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
>> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 11:26 AM
>> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> Subject: RE: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>>
>> So adding "hostId" to the changes wizard would help?
>> Or are all of them not part of the same group?
>>
>>
>> Dirk Bulinckx.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shook
>> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 5:01 PM
>> To: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> Subject: RE: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>>
>> Well, I have my checks mainly set to have a primary ping check with
>> all the other checks for that host dependent on it.
>>
>> I'd love to be able to set the hostID for the whole set to a new
>> matching hostid.
>>
>> Michael D. Shook
>> Technical Analyst
>> Saddle Creek Corporation
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> 863 668 4477 (work)
>> 863 860 4070 (cell)
>> 863 665 1261 (fax)
>> www.saddlecrk.com
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
>> > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 10:26 AM
>> > To: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> > Subject: RE: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>> >
>> > Not sure to understand the questin.
>> >
>> > Could you elaborate?
>> >
>> >
>> > Dirk Bulinckx.
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Shook
>> > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 2:01 PM
>> > To: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> > Subject: RE: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>> >
>> > The suggestion to have the host represent the physical
>> machine is one
>> > I'd like to move to.
>> >
>> > Is it in the wizard to set a new host id for all check dependant on
>> > this check?
>> >
>> > Michael D. Shook
>> > Technical Analyst
>> > Saddle Creek Corporation
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > 863 668 4477 (work)
>> > 863 860 4070 (cell)
>> > 863 665 1261 (fax)
>> > www.saddlecrk.com
>> >
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > On Behalf Of Dirk Bulinckx
>> > > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 1:41 AM
>> > > To: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> > > Subject: RE: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>> > >
>> > > The HostID is not used for the RRD graphs.
>> > > The HostID is only usefull for the numeric paging, it's a numeric
>> > > represenatation of the entry. One that you as user can
>> > > create/edit/.... And it does not have to be unique
>> > >
>> > > The uniqueID is as the name says it unique. A ctrl-D of an
>> > entry will
>> > > indeed duplicated the hostID, but not the uniqueID. The
>> > uniqueID can
>> > > be view via a right-click on the entry (in will be in the context
>> > > menu), and in v6 you will be able to view in the main GUI
>> > (we added a
>> > > column for that).
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Dirk Bulinckx.
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Servers Alive Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 5:26 AM
>> > > To: Servers Alive Discussion List
>> > > Subject: Re: [SA-list] YAFR (yet another feature request)
>> > >
>> > > My issue started with a total disregard for the host id's
>> > in general,
>> > > compounded by frequent check duplication. (for instance, I have 8
>> > > servers for Citrix. I created the checks for the first then
>> > duplicated
>> > > for the other
>> > > 7.)
>> > >
>> > > The trick, I have learned, is that when you duplicate a
>> > check, (with
>> > > CTRL-D for instance,) the HostID of the original check is
>> > maintained
>> > > on the "Copy of" window instead of being blanked out or set
>> > to a new
>> > > unique value.
>> > >
>> > > If you change the settings but don't clear the HostID, it
>> > will save as
>> > > a duplicated HostID of the original.
>> > >
>> > > Then, when you have interchange data and RRD graphs that
>> > are strictly
>> > > tied to the HostID then the last occurance of a duplicated
>> > HostID will
>> > > overwrite the data being saved for each of the prior occurances.
>> > >
>> > > If you delete the HostID value, it will be set to a
>> unique ID upon
>> > > saving and the issue goes away.
>> > >
>> > > So, Dirk, to extend my original feature request...
>> > > Can I get a bugfix on the side?
>> > > Can the HostID be cleared when we duplicate a check?
>> > >
>> > > -Rob
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > I use Host IDs to do just that - id a host. Each host gets
>> > > a unique
>> > > > ID and all checks for that host use the same ID. This
>> > becomes very
>> > > > useful when using the interchange file to generate
>> > reports. I guess
>> > > > you could have SA check to make sure each first level
>> check has a
>> > > > unique host ID but I'm not sure it's needed.
>> > > >
>> > > > Each check also has a unique ID that is determined by SA.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Kevin
>> > > >
>> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > > >> Dirk,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I have had a hard time resolving duplicated host-id's in
>> > the past.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Is there an option that I can enable or can you add an
>> > > option in the
>> > > >> setup window to enable or disable a verification upon
>> > > saving of the
>> > > >> checks to ensure (or allow) duplicated host id's?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Is there a reason to allow dupplication of host id's? I
>> > > did not ever
>> > > >> care about them until I started graphing the checks!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks in advance!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Rob Petty
>> > > >>
>> > > >> 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.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > 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 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 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 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.
>
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.
