[PATCH] Distinguish between warning and critical notifications

[Mark Gius]

Hendrik Baecker wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am 18.11.09 01:02, schrieb Mark Gius:
>   
>> The patch adds 4 configuration directives to service escalations
>> definitions:
>>
>>    first_warning_notification #
>>    last_warning_notification #
>>    first_critical_notification #
>>    last_critical_notification #
>>
>> Behavior is identical to (first|last)_notification, except that they
>> check against the count of warning/critical notifications instead of the
>> number of total notifications.
>>     
>
> Hi,
>
> I really like this but what about unknown state notifications which
> might be used?
>   
I thought of unknowns right after I sent the patch.  We don't really use 
them in our deployment, so I wasn't thinking about them during 
implementation.  It's easy enough to add.
> What about hostescalations? Would you patch them too?
>   
I was going to question the usefulness of this, but they can be both 
"down" and "unreachable."  I'll get an updated patch up sometime next week.

I'd like some feedback on how I modified the CGIs to display the new 
variables.  I was hesitant to add a bunch more columns to that table, 
considering it's already pretty large, so I just put all 4 of the new 
thresholds in the same table entry (all, warn, crit, unknown).  Putting 
all of the thresholds in the same column is unclear without reading the 
source.  I can add new table columns if that's the "proper" thing to 
do.  Or if somebody has a solution I'm not thinking of I'd love for the 
config output to be very clear.

-Gius

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july