Hello,
First, let me say I am very glad to see HM keeps improving. Keep up the great work!
I have a request for the forum on ideas to implement acknowledgements.
Let's say I have a test that will send a page to a person on call when the test result is bad. The action profile is setup so that if the test fails 3 more times, then a 2nd person gets paged.
I would like to implement a way for the first person to "acknowledge" the alert so that the 2nd person doesn't get paged even if the test continues to fail.
I know that with the web based interface, the first person that gets alerted can go to the web interface and disable the test so that the 2nd person doesn't get paged. But I don't want to disable the test. I just want to acknowledge the alert condition so that the 2nd person doesn't get paged.
Thanks in advance for any ideas on how to implement this.
Regards,
NS
Ideas on how to acknowledge alerts for escalations?
I believe that would achieve the desired result.
And it would be most useful if this functionality to suspend the alert actions for the test was available through the web based interface.
Thanks,
Naresh
Thanks,
Naresh
Yes, of course. But HostMonitor doesn't know anything about SMS application and SMS application doesn't know anything about HostMonitor. If we add some command line parameter to HostMonitor and you will setup SMS application to start HostMonitor with these parameters, it will not help because system will start new instance of HostMonitor. So, this new instance will need to find and connect to primary instance and pass data. More logical use Telnet Service for this purpose, it already know how to communicate with HostMonitor and you will be able to run SMS application on any other system.
Regards
Alex
Regards
Alex
I just would like reinforce the idea of the alarm escalation if not acknowledged.
The person on-call or at work may for a reason or another not get the alert and it needs to be escalated, without escalating all the alerts.
Also it would be nice on the status page to see if the alarm has been acknowledged or not so it gives a little peace of mind to the boss to know that something is wrong but it is being addressed. Name of the ackowledger and time acknowledged would be the iceing on top of the cake. Very hand too to prove to management how efficient we are, arent we ?
I had a think about it and we could implement it in HM as it is with some scripts and text files updated by the script and web pages to acknowledge the alert or not and make the script to escalate or not. However we dont have control about updating the status page.
The person on-call or at work may for a reason or another not get the alert and it needs to be escalated, without escalating all the alerts.
Also it would be nice on the status page to see if the alarm has been acknowledged or not so it gives a little peace of mind to the boss to know that something is wrong but it is being addressed. Name of the ackowledger and time acknowledged would be the iceing on top of the cake. Very hand too to prove to management how efficient we are, arent we ?

I had a think about it and we could implement it in HM as it is with some scripts and text files updated by the script and web pages to acknowledge the alert or not and make the script to escalate or not. However we dont have control about updating the status page.
this idea sounds good, but maybe the test should be suspended until restore good status or counter moving ?KS-Soft wrote:If I simplify this task, it will sound like "option that allows manually suspend alert actions triggered by specified test until test restore good status".
Right?
Regards
Alex
if the counter is going up (or down, or just moving ?), it can be a new error... no ?
If test will be suspended, how it can restore good status?this idea sounds good, but maybe the test should be suspended until restore good status or counter moving ?
HostMonitor will not suspend alerts automatically. As I understand we are talking about "option that allows MANUALLY suspend alerts". So, if you do not want to suspend alerts, don't use option.f the counter is going up (or down, or just moving ?), it can be a new error... no ?
I missed something?
Regards
Alex