[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: notification of (action) restarts aren't sent

From: Jo Rhett
Subject: Re: notification of (action) restarts aren't sent
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 02:48:06 -0700

On Jun 11, 2015, at 2:32 AM, Martin Pala <address@hidden> wrote:
> You apply the “action” from one section to event types in completely 
> different context - there is no connection between these two sections.

I am completely and totally baffled by what you are claiming here. There isn’t 
two sections involved. Every one of the sentences I quoted fits on the same 
screen even if you are viewing the page in 640x480 resolution. They are a 
single section, with one sentence leading directly to the next.

> The text you referred ( just 
> says that <action> is one of “alert”, “restart”, “start”, “stop”, “exec” or 
> “unmonitor” … snip from manual regarding the possible actions:

Yes, AFTER it says "Monit provides several tests you can use in a 'check' 
statement to test a service. You can test either for some expected value or 
range and take actions if the value changed.” So in the context of this 
section, an action is something taken when a test fails. There is no ambiguity 

> Please can you tell me where in this text you see the *event type* 
> specification or reference? There isn’t any - it just says that “alert action 
> sends an event” - not that the event type is “action” too (the event type 
> isn’t mentioned at all).

I have no idea what you are babbling about. I have re-read all of my messages 
tonight and the words “event type” are not within them. 

> You just induced that the event type will be “action” when we used word 
> “<action>” in the rule syntax, but the event types are more specific and 
> describe the particular error which triggered it - not the <action> which was 
> performed. Using your interpretation the event type won’t have any sense, 
> because everything can be then marked as “action” event.

No, you added “event type” to this discussion. I haven’t mentioned it tonight. 
I’m staring at a small block of text which doesn’t contain those words.

Go to the link above and read the text. It says I can define a check, and I can 
define an action to be taken when the check fails. The action very clearly says 
it will send an alarm. I am not receiving any alarm.

There no ambiguity here, and your constant attempts to claim that this very 
small page of text is being confused is… bizarre. Baffling. A third grader 
could read that text. I have no idea where you are wandering off to.

> The event types used in alerts are described in alert section: 

Nobody is talking about event types. We are talking about the very clear 
description of the actions to be taken when a check fails.

> Here you can find the list of events and situations when the given event type 
> is used. Again: the “action” event type is not the same as the <action> 
> placeholder in the rule. I’ll modify the “action” event type description in 
> the manual to clarify that this event type is used to notify that the user 
> did some manual action.

Nobody is disputing that. You are a very, very confused person.

Jo Rhett
+1 (415) 999-1798
Skype: jorhett
Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet projects.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]