On 20.03.2014 17:49, Wolfgang wrote:
Why don't you submit a passive check result instead of rescheduling a
passive check?
Am 20.03.2014 10:18, schrieb Serge Noiraud:
Le 19/03/2014 20:05, Michael Friedrich a écrit :
On 13.03.2014 11:48, Serge Noiraud wrote:
Le 13/03/2014 09:42, Michael Friedrich a écrit :
On 12.03.2014 09:36, Serge Noiraud wrote:
Hi,
I found something strange.
I have four services in passive mode. Nothing will change their
states.
The only way to test them was to force one reschedule.
It doesn't work anymore.
Logs? Configs? Exact versions?
versions :
the old was 1.8.4
the new one : 1.10.3
My icinga config :
The only parameter which is different between the two configs is
passive_host_checks_are_soft : 0 in 1.8 and 0 in 1.10
I'm also interested in the service object config extracted from
objects.cache
'passive_host_checks_are_soft' seems not to be different, but since
that affects hosts only, it shouldn't matter.
This was an error in the mail : 0 in 1.8 and 1 in 1.10
From the icinga page, I click on "select command" then "Re-schedule
Next Service check" then submit.
I continue with force check and commit.
Nothing in the LOGs and nothing appends.
Debug log with events/checks/commands tells what?
The only thing I see with debug=-1 and verbosity=2 is :
[1395304966.842148] [008.2] [pid=2224] Service 'Verify_appli1' on
host 'int:srv:icinga'
[1395304966.842152] [008.2] [pid=2224] Service check should not be
scheduled.
Even when you're sending an external command in order to reschedule the
check? That's impossible. Post some more lines (like +-100) from that
'not be scheduled' line.
How does the timeperiod 'workhours' look like?
The service is configured :
define service{
service_description Verify_appli1
host_name int:srv:icinga
check_command check_appels!nombre
is_volatile 1
normal_check_interval 600000 ; 416 days. This is to avoid the
pb for passive rescheduling check
retry_check_interval 1440 ; once a day
max_check_attempts 1
active_checks_enabled 0
check_period workhours
drop the check_period attribute, and try once more.
notification_interval 0
notification_period workhours
notification_options c
notifications_enabled 1
flap_detection_enabled 0
}
For info , we use that possibility for resetting the error on some
services. Rescheduling the passive service use in this case a
check_dummy!0 command.
PS: Please use "reply to list" in your preferred mail client, not
"reply to all".
OK. I used to do that on other lists. So I did the same here.
I found a workaround, but it's not very user's friendly
I must "enable active check of checked service(s)" then do the
"re-schedule next service check" then "disable active check of
checked service(s)"
Is it a new bug or some volontary change?
Dunno. Which external command is used?
I don't want to set them active because I have no periodicity on
this
services : it can be one day or three weeks.
If it can't be possible anymore, can we set those service in
active mode
without automatic check ?
Serge
--
Serge Noiraud
Les logiciels libre, c'est mieux : Debian, Firefox, LibreOffice, ...
Tout ce qui n'est pas gratuit ou libre sera perdu définitivement.
Développeur projet gramps : http://gramps-project.org/ et osm-gps-map
: http://nzjrs.github.com/osm-gps-map
_______________________________________________
icinga-users mailing list
icinga-users@lists.icinga.org
https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users
_______________________________________________
icinga-users mailing list
icinga-users@lists.icinga.org
https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users
--
DI (FH) Michael Friedrich
michael.friedr...@gmail.com || icinga open source monitoring
https://twitter.com/dnsmichi || lead core developer
dnsmi...@jabber.ccc.de || https://www.icinga.org/team
irc.freenode.net/icinga || dnsmichi
_______________________________________________
icinga-users mailing list
icinga-users@lists.icinga.org
https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users
