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 #13413] Wrong order of import when directly assigned service #640
Comments
Updated by tgelf on 2016-12-06 09:20:39 +00:00
Nice problem :D
And, last but not least: why don't you let the Director care about those endpoints and use the "Run on agent / use agent" flag on your services? I cannot switch that order in a generic way as we depend on this with our apply rules. But I guess ™ I could do so for single objects. There was a core issue involved with at least one of them, so YES I guess this could be done. But it requires some care and research first. In the meantime I'd love to hear more about your thoughts on all this ;-) Cheers, |
Updated by TheFlyingCorpse on 2016-12-06 09:29:37 +00:00
The key reason here why I dont use the "icinga agent" directly on the alias (it is used on all managed OS hosts) is because it itself is just a dns cname of the host, its a "bare" host object containing the checks just relevant to the alias. This is useful if you have say 10 different functions for a host and they dont share a customer. its bad to show one massive object for everything that is on it, when its just 1 customer affected by a stopped (windows/linux) service.
btw: I think I have found a workaround: Thoughts? |
Updated by tgelf on 2016-12-06 09:37:06 +00:00 TheFlyingCorpse wrote:
It would fix your issue but probably introduce other ones. There was a reason for a761bb1, but unfortunately I do not remember the details right now. |
Updated by TheFlyingCorpse on 2016-12-06 09:40:29 +00:00 Thanks! I'll try it out a bit. So far I do not have dictionaries used with apply rules, just assign rules :-) I'll try to look into the apply rules at a later date and see if I can piece this out. |
Updated by tgelf on 2016-12-06 09:42:04 +00:00 TheFlyingCorpse wrote:
Ah, remember that we talked about something similar. Now the picture is getting clearer :-) So you have multiple host objects with different names for the very same host, sitting in it's parent zone, correct? What if we introduce this as a feature? Need to find a good name for it, like "Related endpoint node" or so. That way you could benefit from all the magic already existing for Agents. What do you think about it? |
Updated by TheFlyingCorpse on 2016-12-06 09:44:10 +00:00 My thoughts: Yay! |
Updated by tgelf on 2016-12-06 09:53:01 +00:00 TheFlyingCorpse wrote:
Cool :-) Now comes the toughest part: naming. How should we call it? |
Updated by TheFlyingCorpse on 2016-12-06 10:05:35 +00:00 Good question. I called it "parent icinga node" internally, but I am not sure that is fitting. |
Subscribed to this. |
This issue has been migrated from Redmine: https://dev.icinga.com/issues/13413
Created by TheFlyingCorpse on 2016-12-06 08:45:21 +00:00
Assignee: TheFlyingCorpse
Status: Feedback
Target Version: (none)
Last Update: 2016-12-06 10:05:35 +00:00 (in Redmine)
Use case:
Have host objects as aliases of a host and tell it where it needs to go test stuff when it needs to use the icinga2 agent when applicable.
It correctly adds the service to "murggh" in the apply rule, however it fails to directly assign it when you go down to service.conf for the master zone.
This minified configuration showcases the issue, its cleaned up and tried outside of director to see the issue:
Issue:
Moving "import" above the host_name resolves the config validation error in the masters services.conf.
Do you think this is possible to correct in Director?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: