[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: contignuous alert supression

From: Igor Grabin
Subject: Re: contignuous alert supression
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 14:11:35 +0200

On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:05:50PM +0100, Martin Pala wrote:
> Current monit behavior is sufficient, because Monit has both error and 
> recovery alerts. This means that you should take the alert seriously - 
> until you will receive 'recovery' alert, you can be sure that the 
> service is broken.
okay, down to earth with current monit behaviour...
20 seconds timeout, around 8 monitored machines, around 20 alerts a day,
around 1 real alert in a couple of days.
add some human factor to it... It's simple to miss one alert from 21,
when I'm trying to look for real one.
I won't miss an alert when it's screaming out.

> I see no problem in this sense with current monit behavior - it will 
> send you alert and when you will not receive recovery alert in specific 
> timeframe (which you know), the problem is persistent according to your 
> rules.
see above. 20 false alerts - 40 void messages.

Igor "CacoDem0n" Grabin,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]