"action depends on "bad" one" for 'advan

rasc · Post by **rasc** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:30 am

Hi Alex,

sorry if this has already been asked.*
When defining a bad status action with 'advanced mode' such as in repeated alerts the alert action is not choosable for "action depends on "bad" one" condition in good status action.

Please add, it makes 'advanced mode' pretty useless for repeated alerts if one cannot inform about test being OK again .
Especially as any 'good' action is also triggered when a test returns from 'Waiting for Master' to 'Good'.

Thank you.

*The search for the terms
"action depends on "bad" one" or
"action depends on bad one" or
action depends on bad one
threw over 5.000 results. Really did not want to work them through

rasc · Post by **rasc** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:06 am

@all
I find some workaround:
I set up a bad action 'execute external program' and execute the command 'REM' after the 10th consecutive bad.
I then can use that action as reference for 'action depends on "bad" one.

Should be fixed though, IMHO.
Especially that triggering good actions when a test never was bad (but returned from 'wait for master').

P.S. @Alex: You see, now I do post bugs to 'Wish list'

KS-Soft · Post by **KS-Soft** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 9:44 am

Especially as any 'good' action is also triggered when a test returns from 'Waiting for Master' to 'Good'.

Everything depends on expression.
If you are using expression like ("%SimpleStatus%"=="UP") then action will be started after each probe that returns "good" result.
If you use expression like ("%SimpleStatus%"=="UP") and (%Recurrences%==1) then action will be started when test status changes from Bad to Good.
Also you may use expression like ("%Status%"=="Ok") and (%Recurrences%==1) and ("%PreviousStatus%"=="Bad") and (%PreviousStatusDuration_Sec%>300)
Probably new %PreviousSimpleStatus% variable can be useful in some cases

When status changes from "WaitForMaster" -> "Host is alive", HostMonitor does not reset Recurrences counter so action will not be started
(unless test had "Bad" status before entering "WaitForMaster" state).

Alex: You see, now I do post bugs to 'Wish list'

What bug?

Regards
Alex

rasc · Post by **rasc** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 9:52 am

Dear Alex,

I am SO sorry and all is my fault. I should be more expressive.
On the other hand I linked the post and KS-Europe (which will 'only' be a reseller, not you) proposed the stuff.

Anyway, the 'advanced' bad actions KS-Europe proposed are not eligble to be used as 'bad' actions to depend on to trigger 'good' actions.

KS-Soft · Post by **KS-Soft** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:35 am

What exactly conditions do you want to use?

Start Bad action every 100 iterations; do not start Bad action after 1st failure?
('%SimpleStatus%'=='DOWN') and (%Recurrences% > 1) and (%Recurrences% mod 100==1)
Probably it would be better to start actions after 1st or 2nd failure; then every 100 iterations?
('%SimpleStatus%'=='DOWN') and (%Recurrences% mod 100==2)

What condition do you want to use for "Good" action?
If "Bad" action was started, start "Good" action after 1st "good" result?
If Bad action starts after 1st failure, its very easy.

If Bad action starts after 2nd or 10th consecutive failure, its more complicated.
There is no %PreviousRecurrences% variable (probably we should add such option), so you will need to adjust expession depending on test interval.
E.g.
("%SimpleStatus%"=="UP") and (%Recurrences%==1) and (%PreviousStatusDuration_Sec%>61)
this should work if you start Bad action after 2nd failure and test interval 60 sec (just for example).

Regards
Alex

rasc · Post by **rasc** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:07 pm

I was already be OK with just being able to choose triggered 'advanced' bad actions to be a cause for 'good actions.
OK with you too?

KS-Soft · Post by **KS-Soft** » Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:42 pm

Do you mean it would be more easy?
But you still make expression for advanced action

Regards
Alex

rasc · Post by **rasc** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 6:18 am

KS-Soft wrote:Do you mean it would be more easy?
But you still make expression for advanced action

Sure it was easier. Not the 'bad' action itself, but the good action. I would not need to program that dummy 'bad' action(s) that the good actions depend on.