Method to do a 'second knock' as in ServersAlive

[Steven]

Been looking at this topic which would resolve this current issue, I think: http://www.ks-soft.net/cgi-bin/phpBB/vi ... php?t=2294


But I have another question. Tell me if this is correct: If I have HM set right now to alert me after 2nd trip, and I also want to be alerted when the test comes back up again, then will using "this action depends on bad action" work? I do not want to receive alerts that the test is "up" when I never got an alert to say it went "down".

This is what I have:

Bad Action:
send e-mail after 2nd trip

Good Action:
send e-mail depends on bad action: "send e-mail after 2nd trip".

Make sense?

[KS-Soft]

to JuergenF
I thought we are talking about this task right here:
http://www.ks-soft.net/cgi-bin/phpBB/vi ... php?t=2294
Am I wrong?

Will it be possible to define in one test the following:
After x fails set Status to: Notification
After y fails set Status to: Warning
After z fails set Status to: Error

We are no going to implement too many statuses. Just 1 user defined bad status and one user defined good status.
http://www.ks-soft.net/cgi-bin/phpBB/vi ... php?t=2294

to Steven

If I have HM set right now to alert me after 2nd trip, and I also want to be alerted when the test comes back up again, then will using "this action depends on bad action" work? I do not want to receive alerts that the test is "up" when I never got an alert to say it went "down".

Why not? This works right now, this should work in the future

Regards
Alex

[JuergenF]

Dear Alex,

yes we talked about the new statuses.

I see two kinds of requirements for the new statuses:
First example DiskSpace:
- Warning when less than 10 % free
- Alert when less than 5 % free

Example CPU usage:
- Warning when CPU usage > 70%
- Alert when CPU usage > 70% for 5 consecutive tests

Best regards
Juergen

[KS-Soft]

Yes, and we speak about both options in that topic
http://www.ks-soft.net/cgi-bin/phpBB/vi ... 4&start=15

Regards
Alex