Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[dev.icinga.com #8589] Introduce a new node type: FilteredObjectsNode #14

Closed
icinga-migration opened this issue Mar 3, 2015 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or improvement

Comments

@icinga-migration
Copy link

This issue has been migrated from Redmine: https://dev.icinga.com/issues/8589

Created by tgelf on 2015-03-03 15:42:42 +00:00

Assignee: (none)
Status: New
Target Version: (none)
Last Update: 2015-06-24 13:35:20 +00:00 (in Redmine)


I want to be able to create a nodes in a way allowing me to not define objects one by one but by assigning a specific monitoring object filter like host=db*&service=ping. While this first part will be pretty easy, it doesn't suffice. Most people will very soon feel the desire to automagically create multiple node definitions based on specific patterns.

Immagine a structure like this one:

web1 = tomcat1;jmx & tomcat1;web
web2 = tomcat2;jmx & tomcat2;web
...
web14 = tomcat14;jmx & tomcat14;web
web = web1 | web2 | ... | web14

You cannot solve this by just stating something like:

web = (host=tomcat*&(service=web|service=jmx)). 

This would lead to a completely different logic and would not be what you intended to achieve. One possible way to configure what we had in our mind could look as follows:

web* = tomcat*;jmx & tomcat*;web
web = 1 of: web*

Best,
Thomas


Relations:

@icinga-migration
Copy link
Author

Updated by tgelf on 2015-03-09 13:43:56 +00:00

It should be possible to decide whether the filter should be based on hosts, services or both.

@icinga-migration
Copy link
Author

Updated by mfriedrich on 2015-06-24 13:35:20 +00:00

  • Project changed from 63 to Business Process
  • Target Version deleted 248

@icinga-migration
Copy link
Author

Updated by tgelf on 2015-12-16 17:45:31 +00:00

  • Relates set to 10494

@nilmerg
Copy link
Member

nilmerg commented Jul 20, 2022

Duplicate of #328

@nilmerg nilmerg marked this as a duplicate of #328 Jul 20, 2022
@nilmerg nilmerg closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jul 20, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or improvement
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants