Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[dev.icinga.com #11336] Use retry_interval instead of check_interval for first OK -> NOT-OK state change #4014

Closed
icinga-migration opened this issue Mar 9, 2016 · 8 comments
Labels
bug
Milestone

Comments

@icinga-migration
Copy link
Member

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 9, 2016

This issue has been migrated from Redmine: https://dev.icinga.com/issues/11336

Created by mfriedrich on 2016-03-09 10:34:33 +00:00

Assignee: mfriedrich
Status: Resolved (closed on 2016-03-11 11:02:22 +00:00)
Target Version: 2.4.5
Last Update: 2016-04-20 08:15:57 +00:00 (in Redmine)

Icinga Version: 2.4.3
Backport?: Already backported
Include in Changelog: 1

The logic remains in ProcessCheckResult(). The previous fix for this problem in #7287 was broken and has been reverted.

  • Check whether the checkresult was active or passive
    • SetActive() in external command listener and api actions
  • If active and state change, set the next check time using the retry_interval
  • Set the origin for next check updates to prevent cluster checkresult->next_check loops (see the problem in #11273).

Changesets

2016-03-11 11:00:30 +00:00 by mfriedrich 7fb8bcd

Use retry_interval on first OK -> NOT-OK state change

Only valid for active check results. The API actions were
missing that marker similar to the external command processor.

The initial OK -> NOT-OK transition should use the retry_interval
but nothing else.

fixes #11336

2016-03-15 12:02:38 +00:00 by mfriedrich d682f56

Use UpdateNextCheck() for determining the retry_interval in ProcessCheckResult()

This patch also moves the next check updates for passive
check results into ProcessCheckResult(). That way the
next check status updates for DB IDO work in a sane way
again.

refs #11336

2016-03-15 13:02:19 +00:00 by mfriedrich a30cb86

Only call UpdateNextCheck() for soft states

refs #11336

2016-04-20 08:00:07 +00:00 by mfriedrich 122256b

Use retry_interval on first OK -> NOT-OK state change

Only valid for active check results. The API actions were
missing that marker similar to the external command processor.

The initial OK -> NOT-OK transition should use the retry_interval
but nothing else.

fixes #11336

2016-04-20 08:00:08 +00:00 by mfriedrich 8668eb6

Use UpdateNextCheck() for determining the retry_interval in ProcessCheckResult()

This patch also moves the next check updates for passive
check results into ProcessCheckResult(). That way the
next check status updates for DB IDO work in a sane way
again.

refs #11336

2016-04-20 08:00:09 +00:00 by mfriedrich e076e91

Only call UpdateNextCheck() for soft states

refs #11336

Relations:

@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 9, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-09 10:34:46 +00:00

  • Relates set to 7287
@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 11, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-11 09:32:01 +00:00

  • Subject changed from Use retry_interval instead of check_interval for active check results on state change to Use retry_interval instead of check_interval for first OK -> NOT-OK state change
  • Target Version set to 2.5.0
@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 11, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-11 11:02:22 +00:00

  • Status changed from Assigned to Resolved
  • Done % changed from 0 to 100

Applied in changeset 7fb8bcd.

@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 16, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-16 15:01:54 +00:00

  • Relates set to 11243
@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 16, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-16 15:49:49 +00:00

Positive feedback here: https://dev.icinga.org/issues/11243#change-49461

I'd like to see more testers so we can safely backport this to 2.4.5+.

@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 24, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-24 09:37:58 +00:00

  • Parent Id deleted 11310
@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Mar 24, 2016

Updated by mfriedrich on 2016-03-24 10:06:45 +00:00

  • Target Version changed from 2.5.0 to 2.4.5
@icinga-migration

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

@icinga-migration icinga-migration commented Apr 20, 2016

Updated by gbeutner on 2016-04-20 08:15:57 +00:00

  • Backport? changed from Not yet backported to Already backported
@icinga-migration icinga-migration added this to the 2.4.5 milestone Jan 17, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
1 participant
You can’t perform that action at this time.