This may be a stupid question, but here goes:
Am I correct in thinking that when setting up a new host with checks via the wizard, and I select the primary contact or contact group, that the services all inherit this contact?
If so:
If I go into CCM to a specific check on a host and on the Alert Settings tab, change the contact to a differnt group or individual, will this function properly or will it still use the hosts contact group, or both?
We have a scenario where we have some linux server that have attached storage and the alerts should no go to to Unix admins and should go to the Storage admins instead.
I was thinking I could just go into that service check in CCM and change the contact as described above.
Please let me know if I am on the right track, or a what the proper procedure would be to facilitate this.
Thanks
Host Checks vs Service checks
-
slansing
- Posts: 7698
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:28 pm
- Location: Travelling through time and space...
Re: Host Checks vs Service checks
Yes, your logic is correct in both cases. Contacts/Contact Groups are applied to the host and all services through the wizard. You may also go into the ccm and manually change them, and that will give the desired affect, wherever you make that change (host or service objects), the new contacts will be used instead of the ones applied by the wizard. You would of course, have to change the contacts on all of them, if you want all of them to use the new settings, they will not inherit that direction.
You could also create a service template in the ccm, apply the contact changes to it, then apply that template to a group of services. You would have to remove the contact/group definitions from the service itself though if you want it to inherit from the template.
Sorry if that is a bit confusing, I have not had coffee yet.
You could also create a service template in the ccm, apply the contact changes to it, then apply that template to a group of services. You would have to remove the contact/group definitions from the service itself though if you want it to inherit from the template.
Sorry if that is a bit confusing, I have not had coffee yet.
-
krobertson71
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:16 pm
Re: Host Checks vs Service checks
No it's makes sense. Haven't had any coffee yet either and it's 10:30 here.
This would only need to be applied to checks that are monitoring an external mounted partition.
Example as far as logical disks go for a single host:
/
/var
/opt
/boot
These would go to the unix admin team
/externalmount would go to the Storage team if I changed this one check in CCM, even though it inherited the contact group UnixAdmin contact from the Host setup if I change it at the serivce level for this particular check?
That sound like I am good to go then?
This would only need to be applied to checks that are monitoring an external mounted partition.
Example as far as logical disks go for a single host:
/
/var
/opt
/boot
These would go to the unix admin team
/externalmount would go to the Storage team if I changed this one check in CCM, even though it inherited the contact group UnixAdmin contact from the Host setup if I change it at the serivce level for this particular check?
That sound like I am good to go then?
-
slansing
- Posts: 7698
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:28 pm
- Location: Travelling through time and space...
Re: Host Checks vs Service checks
Correct, you would be good to go! The wizards don't typically set up any Nagios inheritance, it just blanket applies the contacts/settings as part of steps 4,5, and 6.
-
krobertson71
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:16 pm
Re: Host Checks vs Service checks
Thank you sir!
Sorry for the double asking.. Just wanted to make sure my brain was processing properly.
Sorry for the double asking.. Just wanted to make sure my brain was processing properly.
-
krobertson71
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:16 pm
Re: Host Checks vs Service checks
Sorry you can close this thread.
I thought I could close my own.
I thought I could close my own.
Re: Host Checks vs Service checks
We'll go ahead and close this thread. Thanks