2 Replies Latest reply on Sep 15, 2011 4:28 PM by mdriskell

    Execute only between these times Alert/Action

    mdriskell

      Is there any way to use reverse logic on the time frames withing an alert/action.

      Here is the scenario.  I have a set of devices that go under maintenance every night from 4AM to 4:20 AM.  I don't want alerts during this period (nor do I want to schedule unmanaging)

      Is my only option to write two actions one that is valid from 12:00 AM to 3:59 AM and a second that is valid 4:20 AM to 11:59 AM?

      I tried to execute only between 4:20 AM and 4:00 AM thinking maybe the system would let me use the reverse and alert manager crashed when I tried to configure it that way.

      I also have scenarios where I want alerts to go out after 5 M-F and all day Sat/Sun but I seem to be in the same boat and need multiple alerts to accomplish this.  Does anyone have any suggestions on a more logical way to accomplish this?

      If this isn't possible I would like to see this become a feature request.

        • Re: Execute only between these times Alert/Action
          netlogix

          I am able to create an alert that will only be checked between 5 am and 4 am (23 hours) and an email alert that will only run between 7 am and 6 am (23 hours), and it works...

          Maybe some specific combination in your setup.  Can you share a little more?

            • Re: Execute only between these times Alert/Action
              mdriskell

              THat's really weird...it's allowing me to save the changes now...I must have had something else going on earlier because every time I tried to save the alert it crashed...I deleted it and created a new one and it works

              Well that fixes the problem I was having with that piece.  I still have to do multiple alerts however for the on call piece because I have two different scenarios there I need alerts to go out from 5PM - 7 AM M-F and 24 hours on Sat Sun but at least this covers the bigger issue I was having.

              Thanks for posting I assumed it was a limitation and wasn't aware I was just getting an abnormal result.