On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 04:19:43PM -0500, Kauffman, Tom wrote:
Henrik -- check me on this: it's my impression we no longer need a 'BBPAGER' entry on the client-side bb-hosts because the hobbit server passes all potentially alertable statuses to hobbit-alert and it decides if an alert is really required.
Correct.
In fact it does make sense to remove it, because then the client will not initiate a connection to the server to send the "page" message - which hobbitd promptly just discards.
Brian -- no offense, but I would rather categorise your configuration as "active/inactive". I'm looking at doing an "active/passive" cluster when time frees up -- about a month from now. The difference? I'm running two hobbit/apache instances all the time -- but the 'passive' (fallover) side is not doing alerting or network tests. It does build displays (it's my technical documentation server as well) and it does keep both history and rrd data updated. Both hosts show up on the client side as 'BBDISPLAY'. On failover it will take over the IP address for the hobbit display and re-launch hobbit with network testing and alerting enabled.
That would certainly be interesting for me as well - it's the kind of setup I plan to implement when I get time.
Regards, Henrik