Excluding a hostgroup from a service check

Gary Every gevery at gmail.com
Thu Apr 9 20:54:42 CEST 2009


On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Sean McAfee <
smcafee at collaborativefusion.com> wrote:

> Edward Trochim wrote:
>
> > And a service definition like this. I want to exclude hostgroup5 from
> > this one service definition:
> >
> > define service{
> >          use                                  standard-check
> >          hostgroup_name               !hostgroup5
> >          service_description  Disk Space
> > }
> >
> > Instead of doing what I want this excludes every hostgroup defined in
> > the template. host1 still gets the service though.
> >
> > I am currently running nagios version 3.0.6.
> >
> > Is this a bug in nagios or am I misunderstanding the way this should
> > behave?
>
> I believe you're just missing the magic "+" that indicates additive
> inheritance instead of making it override.
>
> Try:
>
> define service{
>           use                  standard-check
>           hostgroup_name       +!hostgroup5
>           service_description  Disk Space
> }
>
> --
> Sean McAfee
> System Engineer
>
Sean is right. Otherwise, you're REDEFINING the hostgroup_name directive.
-- 
Gary Every
"Pay it Forward!"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.monitoring-lists.org/archive/users/attachments/20090409/6ffb5a93/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nagios-users mailing list
Nagios-users at lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users
::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. 
::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null


More information about the Users mailing list