Can we have a way to setup a template for a host ?
The idea is that you can create a template will all the checks that you would do on a type of host will all the dependancies and alert profiles configured.
Then all you do is NEW>From Template
Select your NT_SERVER template and enter the IP address.
Hostmon then creates all the tests and links for you from the template.
Q
Host Templates
What we do is the following:
1. Create an import text file with a command script.
2. Import the created text file in HostMonitor.
In that case we always use the same settings for new and known tests. In our case we can pass several options to the script, which wil generate the various tests we need for a particular host.
For example we can generate tests for sql, oracle, exchange, etc...
1. Create an import text file with a command script.
2. Import the created text file in HostMonitor.
In that case we always use the same settings for new and known tests. In our case we can pass several options to the script, which wil generate the various tests we need for a particular host.
For example we can generate tests for sql, oracle, exchange, etc...
-
eurodrew555
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 5:29 am
There is a very easy way to do this, which I'm sure Alex could implement very easily.
Imagine that you have the following structure
SERVERS
- NEO
- ping test
- MORPHEUS
- ping test
- TRINITY
- ping test
There is a macro called %FOLDER%
If you could create for example an SNMP test with:
Address[:port] %FOLDER%.your.domain
Test Name: %FOLDER%: SNMP: OID example....
Master Test: %FOLDER%
If the %FOLDER% MACRO could be used for these values, you could simply copy the tests into any other SERVER folder and the test would pickup the correct SERVER values and also name the test correctly.
These are the conventions we use throughout our tests, and a macro such as this would work perfectly.
An alternative would be a macro value that could be tagged to a folder name, that could be applied in the same method. You could then have descriptive folders, such as NEO (Snort) - yet the macro would be NEO and would then apply throughout your test.
You could therefore easily create templates to be used on all your servers.
Alex - any comments on this ??
Cheers,
Andrew
Imagine that you have the following structure
SERVERS
- NEO
- ping test
- MORPHEUS
- ping test
- TRINITY
- ping test
There is a macro called %FOLDER%
If you could create for example an SNMP test with:
Address[:port] %FOLDER%.your.domain
Test Name: %FOLDER%: SNMP: OID example....
Master Test: %FOLDER%
If the %FOLDER% MACRO could be used for these values, you could simply copy the tests into any other SERVER folder and the test would pickup the correct SERVER values and also name the test correctly.
These are the conventions we use throughout our tests, and a macro such as this would work perfectly.
An alternative would be a macro value that could be tagged to a folder name, that could be applied in the same method. You could then have descriptive folders, such as NEO (Snort) - yet the macro would be NEO and would then apply throughout your test.
You could therefore easily create templates to be used on all your servers.
Alex - any comments on this ??
Cheers,
Andrew
When I started work on HostMonitor 6, I had hundreds of small tasks and 8 BIG tasks in my "to do" list. "Big task" means task requires serious consideration and probably a lot of changes in the code.
3 of 8 big tasks already implemented. I am working on 4th (version 6.50); I think 5th task will be implemented in version 6.60.
Templates - big task #6. May be it will be done in version 6.xx as well, may be not. Why not? Because there are 2 ways to implement it: one is simple like your idea; another is much more complicated but more powerful.
Let us finish task #4 and #5, then we will talk about templates
Regards
Alex
3 of 8 big tasks already implemented. I am working on 4th (version 6.50); I think 5th task will be implemented in version 6.60.
Templates - big task #6. May be it will be done in version 6.xx as well, may be not. Why not? Because there are 2 ways to implement it: one is simple like your idea; another is much more complicated but more powerful.
Let us finish task #4 and #5, then we will talk about templates
Regards
Alex
How far in the future do you see Task #6 becoming a reality? - I hereby affirm that I will in no way hold you to any deadline stated or implied by your response
We're getting ready to overhaul our HostMonitor response documentation and depending on how you implement the templates might change the whole paradigm of how we handle responses and make our response guide an integrated part of the test using the comment field.
Also can you shed any light on the direction that you are tending in regard to the solution: simple? powerful? both?
Thanks,
Jeff
We're getting ready to overhaul our HostMonitor response documentation and depending on how you implement the templates might change the whole paradigm of how we handle responses and make our response guide an integrated part of the test using the comment field.
Also can you shed any light on the direction that you are tending in regard to the solution: simple? powerful? both?
Thanks,
Jeff
Decision has not been made yet.
I think we implement "simple templates" in version 7.0. Probably we add some folder related inheritable macro variables that should be resolved at test execution time. Plus we will need to add some option to choose RMA, alert and schedule profiles on folder-level....
Regards
Alex
I think we implement "simple templates" in version 7.0. Probably we add some folder related inheritable macro variables that should be resolved at test execution time. Plus we will need to add some option to choose RMA, alert and schedule profiles on folder-level....
Regards
Alex
-
thomasschmeidl
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:14 pm
- Location: Germany, Bavaria
Hi Alex,When I started work on HostMonitor 6, I had hundreds of small tasks and 8 BIG tasks in my "to do" list.
...
I think 5th task will be implemented in version 6.60.
Templates - big task #6.
do you think it is possible to publish the improvements (at least the BIG ones) planned in near future? This could be very helpful for us (customers).
Regards
Thomas