On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Nigel Jones wrote: > On Sun, April 27, 2008 11:01 pm, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > > Nigel Jones wrote: > >> Looking through my email, from what I can recall there are no false > >> positives. xen6 had to be power-cycled which caused all the other > >> collateral notifications. > >> > > > > Collateral notifications can be caught using service dependencies and > > parent hosts. Do we currently use any? > I believe we do, but it wouldn't have helped in this case (I've done a bit > more digging) > > Half the notifications came from the external nagios instance on noc2, > while the xen6/db alerts came from the internal nagios instance. Another > reason why I like the current setup and don't think we should change a > thing :) > > Also, the UNKNOWN alerts weren't that bad, they were a precursor to the > box having to restarted, only in this case was the up/down alerts a little > useless. However, I'd sooner keep them as it because otherwise we run the > risk of not noticing a box down immediately and get everyone under the > moon asking "why can't I access fedoraproject.org... it's down your OS > can't be that good". One thing I would like implemented is event handlers. Some things (probably not this thing) could be handled automatically for us. -Mike _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
