[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [hobbit] Nesting rules in hobbit-alerts.cfg
- To: hobbit (at) hswn.dk
- Subject: Re: [hobbit] Nesting rules in hobbit-alerts.cfg
- From: "Stewart L" <stewartl42 (at) gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:48:55 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=lRgcUjxBH7v7mrpBp6jPTZy5nzCDcibd9F1VqfiCakM=; b=jcGr/ctTQJomxrzUowl90TqY/flJzDQrjYT2xiuXq+Q8qHtwdyol1mUaujWPgX1FtunOXLrg7oskdMTYeprDj3vmdIKYiN6FmrzWLZzU06uvLArYTJiNMSqVYbsDsBBfsUX1EpjHuMgWHuVCv97uoKd0UAkevLTkaxbwJyTzBnU=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=UQ1RruCGlRncOg+iena4R+fcljJMSFE1B9UI/kxolWd6Hk3Pdr4kkDScLzJDXJ8HKQKsNAm9HBdMfjr21jzPq7jve/8dTOCVIHCMD29PIXuIy+/EBFpVjt+wBeJnEao9XuB1HPuCBQ1HyiN/fsmNa+p5kGpUKIYWHT+nGJKVY90=
- References: <29f517690803171026x7dda9de6k919c2e18a695fc79 (at) mail.gmail.com>
You could use macros...
$hg-pager=%(^hostA|$hostB|^hostC)
$hg-email=%%(hostD[0-9])
PAGE=hostPageA NOTICE RECOVERED
HOST=$hg-pager
MAIL pager (at) somewhere.com
HOST=$hg-email
MAIL email (at) somewhere.com
This keeps all the clutter out of the rule sets.
Stewart
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Gary Baluha <gumby3203 (at) gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to nest rules in hobbit-alerts.cfg? For example, can I do
> something like this (indenting provided for readability):
>
> PAGE=hostPageA NOTICE RECOVERED
> HOST=hostA,hostB,hostC
> MAIL pager (at) somewhere.com
> HOST=%(hostD[0-9])
> MAIL email (at) somewhere.com
>
> Our alerting rules are starting to get kind of complex, and nesting alert
> rules as above would make things easier. I know I could do something like:
>
> PAGE=hostPageA NOTICE RECOVERED
> MAIL pager (at) somewhere.com HOST=hostA,hostB,hostC
> MAIL email (at) somewhere.com HOST=%(hostD[0-9])
>
> But some of the HOST= lists are very long (i.e. wrap across multiple
> lines), so the above 2nd example would look a lot uglier than it does in
> this post (which was simplified for readability). If nesting rules won't
> work, I wonder how much effort would be involved in adding this feature.
>
--
Stewart
The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will be no re-run brothers;
The revolution will be live.