Community
- Command Central
- MVP Program
- Monthly Mission
- Blogs
- Groups
- Events
- Media Vault
Products
- Observability
- Network Management
- Application Management
- IT Security
- IT Service Management
- System Management
- Database Management
Content Exchange
- SolarWinds Platform
- Server & Application Monitor
- Database Performance Analyzer
- Server Configuration Monitor
- Network Performance Monitor
- Network Configuration Manager
- SQL Sentry
- Web Help Desk
Free Tools & Trials
Store

Alert assitance

Hi,

Need help setting up an alert that fires when the following is true...

If any of the servers (100+) in a certain group have a volume with >= 1GB of free space

I can get the alert to fire without using groups and listing each server individually (Node name). I'd prefer to use groups instead of having enter each server name.

Thanks,

James

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

aLTeReGo

The easiest way to do this would be to add the interfaces themselves to the group. Then the group would reflect the status of the interfaces contained in the group using either worst of mixed status.

All comments

aLTeReGo

The easiest option is to utilize custom properties if there's no common naming convention, IP address schema or anything else that makes these group of hosts unique. It's not yet possible to leverage group membership for volume utilization alerts.

pompeychimes

Is it possible to leverage group membership with interface down alerts? My goal...

Fire alert if any node in Group A has an interface that is operationally down

Thanks,

James

rjnicholson

I haven't tested this, but you can build an alert like you are asking but I think the way the alerting engine works that the logic would be broken.

Change the type of property to monitor to Group and build your first condition for the Group then change the property to Interface or Volume for the alert you're building.

Trigger Alert when all of the following apply

Group Name is equal to <Name of Group you have Built and added Nodes to>

Interface Status is not equal to Up <--- This way covers other status failures other than down if needed. If not just change is equal to Down.

Volume Space Available is less than or equal to XXXX <-- This would be in bytes I believe so you would need to convert 1 GB to Bytes which is cake, or you could use the Volume Percent Available.

Now for my issue with this build. The logic doesn't work for me and here is why I think it won't work along with what Alter was saying. A Group doesn't have an Interface or a Volume directly under it. It contains Nodes which in turn have Interfaces and Volumes. I don't think the alerting engine watching the group property is concerned with Volumes and Interfaces since they sit at a deeper layer under the Node. From what I can understand you would still need to be able to tell the alert to not only check the Group, but then scan the Interfaces and Volumes of the Nodes belonging to the Group and alert when either one reaches X variable.

If I was the alert and I was performing the action and sticking strictly to my conditions I would say... Ok Group is Group A.. Check.. Interfaces or Volumes.. Hmm I only have Nodes no Interfaces or Volumes directly under me, so I'm good to go nothing wrong!!

I can't verify this for sure since my Lab is down right now due to a remodel, so even though I can build the alert I have no way of testing this logic out for you and seeing if it's off, but hopefully you see how I'm trying to have you look at the approach of how the alert engine works.

I would just Use a unique Custom Property like Alter stated and do a True/False value for nodes you want to be a part of this "Group". A bit more work, but you can get exactly what you are looking for with this route and be able to control the Groupings as you wanted. This way your alert can be a simple 2 or 3 conditions to alert upon 100+ nodes.

aLTeReGo

The easiest way to do this would be to add the interfaces themselves to the group. Then the group would reflect the status of the interfaces contained in the group using either worst of mixed status.

rjnicholson

Good call. Didn't think of adding them to the group, but since you can.. There ya go!