Hi,

> On 15. Jun 2018, at 10:29, Peter Eckel <li...@eckel-edv.de> wrote:
> 
> Hi Thomas, 
> 
>> Time periods in Icinga 2 have initially been designed to allow for
>> alternative implementations. There have been related experiments, but as
>> far as I know no other implementation has ever been published.
> 
> funny, just this week I asked myself the same question ... thanks for 
> clarifying. 

I’ve updated the docs for 2.9: https://github.com/Icinga/icinga2/pull/6372

Icinga 2 v2.6.0 added default templates for objects where the import of 
“legacy-timeperiod” is not necessary anymore. At the time of writing, there are 
no plans to extend timeperiods to use a different mechanism, this was just in 
the design >4 years ago. Turned out that such dynamic periods cannot be 
rendered into a database scheme where one could reliably do SLA reporting at 
some later point.


> 
> A related question, or maybe an idea for an upcoming alternative 
> implementation: Is there any way to define time periods in a different time 
> zone than the one used for the server? 

There’s an open feature request for this: 
https://github.com/Icinga/icinga2/issues/5374

Kind regards,
Michael

_______________________________________________
icinga-users mailing list
icinga-users@lists.icinga.org
https://lists.icinga.org/mailman/listinfo/icinga-users

Reply via email to