On 12/21/2009 08:09 AM, Tata, Joseph wrote:
Which version of Nagios are you using? 2.x does not seem to inherit
properties or define services for hostgroups/servicegroups as
described in the documentation for 3.x.
nagios-3.2.0
Secondly services have their own notification periods which can b
On 12/16/2009 04:43 AM, Martin Melin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm sure that when you tell me what the "null" notification period does,
>> I'll understand how. For now, I don't, because it doesn't seem to be
>> documented.
>>
> null is a va
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 12/15/2009 11:03 PM, Martin Melin wrote:
>> I don't understand why this is confusing.
>>
> ...
>> By setting "notification_period null" in your service definition, you
>> are explicitly overriding all forms of inheritance and setting the
On 12/15/2009 11:03 PM, Martin Melin wrote:
> I don't understand why this is confusing.
>
...
> By setting "notification_period null" in your service definition, you
> are explicitly overriding all forms of inheritance and setting the
> notification_period to null, which happens to be a special
I don't understand why this is confusing.
You have a service template that defines a timeperiod. All services
that use that template will inherit the notification_period value from
the template, if they don't specify a notification_period themselves.
By setting "notification_period null" in your
On 12/15/2009 01:38 PM, Marc Powell wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
>
>> Quoting from the documentation:
>>
>> The following table lists the object variables that will be implicitly
>> inherited from related objects if you don't explicitly specify their value
>> in
On Dec 15, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 12/15/2009 10:49 AM, Marc Powell wrote:
>>
>> No, in order to do that, the notification_period needs to be unspecified.
>> null != unspecified. Because you're explicitly setting it to null, you break
>> the implied inheritance.
>>
>> To
On 12/15/2009 10:49 AM, Marc Powell wrote:
No, in order to do that, the notification_period needs to be unspecified. null
!= unspecified. Because you're explicitly setting it to null, you break the
implied inheritance.
To take advantage of the implied inheritance, you need to leave out the
d
On Dec 15, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> On 12/15/2009 12:52 AM, Martin Melin wrote:
>> Have you tried leaving out the notification_period line from the
>> service definition? I think, but don't have time to verify, that by
>> saying "notification_period null" you are actually overri
On 12/15/2009 12:52 AM, Martin Melin wrote:
> Have you tried leaving out the notification_period line from the
> service definition? I think, but don't have time to verify, that by
> saying "notification_period null" you are actually overriding all
> inherited values for notification_period and set
Have you tried leaving out the notification_period line from the
service definition? I think, but don't have time to verify, that by
saying "notification_period null" you are actually overriding all
inherited values for notification_period and setting it to null
instead.
Best regards,
Martin Melin
The documentation on "Implied Inheritance"[1] indicates that a service
with no notification period will use the notification period of the
associated host definition. This doesn't seem to work when a service is
applied to a hostgroup.
In my configuration files, I define a generic service templ
12 matches
Mail list logo
