[opennms-discuss] OpenNMS Easterhack Review / Status Box

[Seibold, Michael]

Hi Ronny and "the gang",

first: great work and thanks for that!

second: I want to give my opinion about the status box on the main page. Yes, I agree that in large environments the list is to short (in ours too). But compared with the donut-design it has also one big advantage:


- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.

- same for "Nodes with outages".

- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.

Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.

One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.

The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that

- planned outages have a limited time span

- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)

whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.

So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.

-Michael

[Marcel Fuhrmann]

@Michael take this one https://issues.opennms.org/browse/NMS-9314
😉

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
second: I want to give my opinion about the status box on the main
page. Yes, I agree that in large environments the list is to short (in
ours too). But compared with the donut-design it has also one big
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed
alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call
"since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at
the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms
at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around
to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be
responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you
probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's
just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with
the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment
you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for
some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above
filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance
mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those
lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other
monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged
is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will
probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is
responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be
cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting
data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for
objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in
maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened
an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it
any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael

[Ronny Trommer]

Hi Michael,

thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.

First:
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.

Second:
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.

@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?

* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both

Thanks Ronny

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

[Norbert Steinhoff]

Hi Ronny

how about a combination of both ?

The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.

This links should not open in the same window but in a popup or in a new tab. So you don’t loose focus on the dashboard.

And in the node details -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and
with configurable max.maintenance.duration (defined in opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.

If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.

Best
Norbert

Post by Ronny Trommer
Hi Michael,
thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.
@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?
* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both
Thanks Ronny

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

[Ronny Trommer]

Hi guys,

talking about the status box feature, I would like focus just on the two options, the whole “Maintenance Mode” vs. "Scheduled Outages" is completely different story and out of scope for the status box enhancement.

@Michael
What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny
how about a combination of both ?
The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.
This links should not open in the same window but in a popup or in a new tab. So you don’t loose focus on the dashboard.
And in the node details -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and
with configurable max.maintenance.duration (defined in opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.
If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.
Best
Norbert

Post by Ronny Trommer
Hi Michael,
thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.
@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?
* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both
Thanks Ronny

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

[Markus von Rüden]

Hey guys,

I reverted the changes to leave the “XYZ with Problems” boxes as they were before.

Instead of showing 4 donut charts by default, only 3 are shown:
* Node status based on alarms
* Node status based on outages
* Business Service status

The order and what to show is configurable in opennms.properties.

TL;DR:
No change to the Top N boxes.
In addition, status boxes (donut charts) will be shown by default.
Which charts and the position of the chart is configurable via opennms.properties.

Cheers
- Markus

Post by Ronny Trommer
Hi guys,
talking about the status box feature, I would like focus just on the two options, the whole “Maintenance Mode” vs. "Scheduled Outages" is completely different story and out of scope for the status box enhancement.
@Michael
What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny
how about a combination of both ?
The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.
This links should not open in the same window but in a popup or in a new tab. So you don’t loose focus on the dashboard.
And in the node details -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and
with configurable max.maintenance.duration (defined in opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.
If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.
Best
Norbert

Post by Ronny Trommer
Hi Michael,
thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.
@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?
* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both
Thanks Ronny

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

[Michael Batz]

Hi,

 
just another idea to address the problem for getting an overview of outages in bigger environments:

 
For a customer who monitors a network with around 8000 devices and many locations (has nothing to do with the Minion location concept), we placed each node in a surveillance category named "Location-<location-name>" (e.g. Location-Fulda, Location-Stuttgart, ...). For the OpenNMS start page, we implemented a box which shows the top 10 locations with outages.

 
Example Box:

 
Location with Device ouatges (top 10):

- Fulda (2/21 nodes)

- Stuttgart (1/40 nodes)

 
 
For them it is very useful to see the outages by location, as in a network of this size there will always be an outage. We build some other pages to see the nodes in each locations with status and so they have a drill down view.

 
This was a very specific solution for this environment, but maybe the idea can be used to build a more generic approach. For example to build groups of nodes and show a box with outages by group:

 
Example Box:

 
Group outages (top 10):

- Web-Servers (2/21 nodes)

- Mail-Servers (1/3 nodes)

 
Best regards

Michael

 
Michael Batz - Professional Services & Solutions

 
NETHINKS GmbH | Bahnhofstraße 16 | 36037 Fulda



T [phone] | F [phone] | ***@nethinks.com



GeschÀftsfÌhrer: Uwe Bergmann | Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Garry Glendown | AG Fulda HRB 2546

 

 
-----UrsprÃŒngliche Nachricht-----
Von:Markus von RÃŒden <***@opennms.com>
Gesendet:Mi 10.05.2017 21:16
Betreff:Re: [opennms-discuss] OpenNMS Easterhack Review / Status Box
Anlage:signature.asc
An:General OpenNMS Discussion <opennms-***@lists.sourceforge.net>;

Hey guys,
 I reverted the changes to leave the “XYZ with Problems” boxes as they were before.
 Instead of showing 4 donut charts by default, only 3 are shown:
 * Node status based on alarms
 * Node status based on outages
 * Business Service status 
 The order and what to show is configurable in opennms.properties.
 TL;DR:
No change to the Top N boxes.
In addition, status boxes (donut charts) will be shown by default.
Which charts and the position of the chart is configurable via opennms.properties.
 Cheers
- Markus

On 9. May 2017, at 22:22, Ronny Trommer <***@opennms.org <mailto:***@opennms.org> > wrote:

Hi guys,
 talking about the status box feature, I would like focus just on the two options, the whole “Maintenance Mode” vs. "Scheduled Outages" is completely different story and out of scope for the status box enhancement.
 @Michael
What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?
 
On 9. May 2017, at 19:52, Norbert Steinhoff <***@herr-der-mails.de <mailto:***@herr-der-mails.de> > wrote:

Hi Ronny
 how about a combination of both ?
 The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.
 This links should not open in the same window but in a popup  or in a new tab. So you don’t loose  focus on the dashboard.
 And in the node details  -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and  
with configurable max.maintenance.duration  (defined in  opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.
 If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.

Best
Norbert 

 
Am 09.05.2017 um 19:02 schrieb Ronny Trommer <***@opennms.org <mailto:***@opennms.org> >:

Hi Michael,
 thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.
 First:
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.
 Second:
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.
 @Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?
 * Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both
 Thanks  Ronny

On 9. May 2017, at 17:16, Seibold, Michael <***@gkvi.de <mailto:***@gkvi.de> > wrote:

Hi Ronny and "the gang",
 first: great work and thanks for that!
 second: I want to give my opinion about the status box on the main page. Yes, I agree that in large environments the list is to short (in ours too). But compared with the donut-design it has also one big advantage:
 -       in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
-       same for "Nodes with outages".
-       systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them. 
 Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
 One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...)  systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
 The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
-       planned outages have a limited time span
-       setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
 whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
 So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter.  I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
 -Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/> ! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/> ! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/> ! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://Slashdot.org> ! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot



_______________________________________________
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss





































































































__





SAVE THE DATE! Unsere kommenden Veranstaltungen:


************************************************





12. Mai 2017 | fibit 2017 - Technologie- und IT-Messe Fulda


17. Mai 2017 | Webinar: Verteiltes Monitoring mit OpenNMS Minions - Eine Einfuehrung





Eine Übersicht über unsere Veranstaltungen erhalten Sie unter: www.nethinks.com/events

[Ronny Trommer]

Hello World,

I’ve added a screenshot in the wiki [1]. Seems to me the best compromise solution we can iterate to get the start page more useful. Another topic is the column on the right which uses a little less than 30% of the space just for searching and showing notifications and need improvements as well. Markus has already some ideas we can iterate on how to improve the start page. I’ve added also the input which came up during the discussion in the project wiki page. The issue with “Maintenance Mode vs. Scheduled Outage” should needs to be handled in a different topic and was helpful.

Markus created a PR against develop [2] once it’s merged it is available for testing in lastest snapshot [3] so we can move forward.

Thank you for feedback

[1] https://wiki.opennms.org/wiki/DevProjects/Status_Box#Improvements <https://wiki.opennms.org/wiki/DevProjects/Status_Box#Improvements>
[2] https://github.com/OpenNMS/opennms/pull/1483 <https://github.com/OpenNMS/opennms/pull/1483>
[3] https://hub.docker.com/r/opennms/horizon-core-web/

Post by Ronny Trommer
Hi guys,
talking about the status box feature, I would like focus just on the two options, the whole “Maintenance Mode” vs. "Scheduled Outages" is completely different story and out of scope for the status box enhancement.
@Michael
What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny
how about a combination of both ?
The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.
This links should not open in the same window but in a popup or in a new tab. So you don’t loose focus on the dashboard.
And in the node details -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and
with configurable max.maintenance.duration (defined in opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.
If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.
Best
Norbert

Post by Ronny Trommer
Hi Michael,
thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.
@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?
* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both
Thanks Ronny

Post by Seibold, Michael
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

[Seibold, Michael]

Probably there are as much possibilities "what is the best solution" as there are use cases.
What's about a collection of those different "boxes" and the possibility to enable/disable them in the config? Some kind of "configurable dashboard"?

Disadvantages:

- needs some logic about sizing them, don't know how powerful the API is.

- more code to write and maintain

- troubleshooting will be more difficult. Users tend to forget that they have customized this page and they will ask strange questions about "that box in the lower left corner"



Ø What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?

Well, personally I like the behaviour right now because you can see "at one glance" the newest open problems and how long ago they occured without the need of any mouse movement, opening new tabs etc.. It's a really "very quick first glance" like ... - you are sitting in front of your system and some customer calls you by phone with "email client fails, internet connections break, SAP sessions die, ...". You are responsible for the network, so you just open your opennms and want to see if there are (probably big) problems raised just now in the last few moments.
So with the actual boxes in the first troubleshooting step you don't have to check outages, alarms, notifications, events for details.
One improvement would be the following:
for those two boxes on the left side, take the still available hight of the left column, divide it by 2, and if this value is greater than the actual hight of the boxes adjust them so that each of them will obtain half of the screen hight.
On my screen by example the left column is to about 1/3 empty in this left column.
This could be made still more sophisticated ("if there are only 2 pending problems give the rest of the column to the other table" ...), but dividing the available space equally (if there is more than needed now) shold be a quite good solution, avoiding too much coding.

-Michael


Von: Ronny Trommer [mailto:***@opennms.org]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Mai 2017 17:26
An: General OpenNMS Discussion <opennms-***@lists.sourceforge.net>
Betreff: Re: [opennms-discuss] OpenNMS Easterhack Review / Status Box

Hello World,

I’ve added a screenshot in the wiki [1]. Seems to me the best compromise solution we can iterate to get the start page more useful. Another topic is the column on the right which uses a little less than 30% of the space just for searching and showing notifications and need improvements as well. Markus has already some ideas we can iterate on how to improve the start page. I’ve added also the input which came up during the discussion in the project wiki page. The issue with “Maintenance Mode vs. Scheduled Outage” should needs to be handled in a different topic and was helpful.

Markus created a PR against develop [2] once it’s merged it is available for testing in lastest snapshot [3] so we can move forward.

Thank you for feedback

[1] https://wiki.opennms.org/wiki/DevProjects/Status_Box#Improvements
[2] https://github.com/OpenNMS/opennms/pull/1483
[3] https://hub.docker.com/r/opennms/horizon-core-web/

On 9. May 2017, at 22:22, Ronny Trommer <***@opennms.org<mailto:***@opennms.org>> wrote:

Hi guys,

talking about the status box feature, I would like focus just on the two options, the whole “Maintenance Mode” vs. "Scheduled Outages" is completely different story and out of scope for the status box enhancement.

@Michael
What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?


On 9. May 2017, at 19:52, Norbert Steinhoff <***@herr-der-mails.de<mailto:***@herr-der-mails.de>> wrote:

Hi Ronny

how about a combination of both ?

The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.

This links should not open in the same window but in a popup or in a new tab. So you don’t loose focus on the dashboard.

And in the node details -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and
with configurable max.maintenance.duration (defined in opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.

If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.

Best
Norbert



Am 09.05.2017 um 19:02 schrieb Ronny Trommer <***@opennms.org<mailto:***@opennms.org>>:

Hi Michael,

thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.

First:
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.

Second:
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.

@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?

* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both

Thanks Ronny

On 9. May 2017, at 17:16, Seibold, Michael <***@gkvi.de<mailto:***@gkvi.de>> wrote:

Hi Ronny and "the gang",

first: great work and thanks for that!

second: I want to give my opinion about the status box on the main page. Yes, I agree that in large environments the list is to short (in ours too). But compared with the donut-design it has also one big advantage:

- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.

Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.

One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.

The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)

whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.

So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.

-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org<http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org<http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org<http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org<http://Slashdot.org>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
Please read the OpenNMS Mailing List FAQ:
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ

opennms-discuss mailing list

To *unsubscribe* or change your subscription options, see the bottom of this page:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

[Markus von Rüden]

Hey Michael,

thank you for your feedback.
I think all of your suggestions make perfectly sense.

As Ronny said, we decided to leave the top n boxes untouched based on your feedback.
So they are exactly how they were before.
I agree that there is room of improvement for the top N boxes, but that is out of scope for now.

In addition we made the status boxes configurable (in a simple way).
One can disable it completely or enable/disable each chart manually.

A future improvement could be to define the queries manually and have a more powerful API.
E.g. allow users to show boxes by categories, or define the queries to fetch alarms manually, or other calculation strategies.
There is always room for improvement.

So far
- Markus

Post by Seibold, Michael
Probably there are as much possibilities "what is the best solution" as there are use cases.
What's about a collection of those different "boxes" and the possibility to enable/disable them in the config? Some kind of "configurable dashboard"?
- needs some logic about sizing them, don't know how powerful the API is.
- more code to write and maintain
- troubleshooting will be more difficult. Users tend to forget that they have customized this page and they will ask strange questions about "that box in the lower left corner"
Ø What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?
Well, personally I like the behaviour right now because you can see "at one glance" the newest open problems and how long ago they occured without the need of any mouse movement, opening new tabs etc.. It's a really "very quick first glance" like ... - you are sitting in front of your system and some customer calls you by phone with "email client fails, internet connections break, SAP sessions die, ...". You are responsible for the network, so you just open your opennms and want to see if there are (probably big) problems raised just now in the last few moments.
So with the actual boxes in the first troubleshooting step you don't have to check outages, alarms, notifications, events for details.
for those two boxes on the left side, take the still available hight of the left column, divide it by 2, and if this value is greater than the actual hight of the boxes adjust them so that each of them will obtain half of the screen hight.
On my screen by example the left column is to about 1/3 empty in this left column.
This could be made still more sophisticated ("if there are only 2 pending problems give the rest of the column to the other table" ...), but dividing the available space equally (if there is more than needed now) shold be a quite good solution, avoiding too much coding.
-Michael
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Mai 2017 17:26
Betreff: Re: [opennms-discuss] OpenNMS Easterhack Review / Status Box
Hello World,
I’ve added a screenshot in the wiki [1]. Seems to me the best compromise solution we can iterate to get the start page more useful. Another topic is the column on the right which uses a little less than 30% of the space just for searching and showing notifications and need improvements as well. Markus has already some ideas we can iterate on how to improve the start page. I’ve added also the input which came up during the discussion in the project wiki page. The issue with “Maintenance Mode vs. Scheduled Outage” should needs to be handled in a different topic and was helpful.
Markus created a PR against develop [2] once it’s merged it is available for testing in lastest snapshot [3] so we can move forward.
Thank you for feedback
[1] https://wiki.opennms.org/wiki/DevProjects/Status_Box#Improvements <https://wiki.opennms.org/wiki/DevProjects/Status_Box#Improvements>
[2] https://github.com/OpenNMS/opennms/pull/1483 <https://github.com/OpenNMS/opennms/pull/1483>
[3] https://hub.docker.com/r/opennms/horizon-core-web/ <https://hub.docker.com/r/opennms/horizon-core-web/>
Hi guys,
talking about the status box feature, I would like focus just on the two options, the whole “Maintenance Mode” vs. "Scheduled Outages" is completely different story and out of scope for the status box enhancement.
@Michael
What do you think about the “Mouse over Top N tables” instead of having them as a box on the start page. Would something like that work for you?
Hi Ronny
how about a combination of both ?
The status box should have some mouse over / hover in the "rings" which opens a list with the latest outages/events
from the hovered section with links to the affected nodes.
This links should not open in the same window but in a popup or in a new tab. So you don’t loose focus on the dashboard.
And in the node details -> a button for Maintenance mode (like Michael described before) till Service / Node comes back and
with configurable max.maintenance.duration (defined in opennms.properties). This timeframe prevents node from being forgotten ;)
During maintenance, no new events, no notifications.
If maintenance mode is active it should be shown on the nodes page like the outages, but with date/time when the maintenance
modes ends automatically.
Best
Norbert
Hi Michael,
thanks a lot for your detailed explanation and this helps a lot.
The old list boxes are still available and are not removed. We just don’t have included them but the functionality is still there.
I would suggest make them fit for the use case you have described. We could call them “Top N {Alarms/Outages/Applications/Business Services}”, where N is the number you have configured in the opennms.properties as the limit.
I definitely like your description "maintenance mode" vs. "scheduled outages”. I can help with working out the use cases and get it transformed into JIRA.
@Reader
What would you like to see as the default view when you have the choice between the “Top N” boxes and the new “Status Overview” box?
* Just the "Top N Boxes"
* Just the Status Overview Box
* Both
Thanks Ronny
Hi Ronny and "the gang",
first: great work and thanks for that!
- in "Nodes with pending problems" you see the newest unack'ed alarms first, as they are ordered "new ones on top". If you get a call "since about 10 Minutes we have following problem..." you can see at the first glance (if the list is long enough...) if there were alarms at this time which are still unack'ed. You don't have to click around to get there.
- same for "Nodes with outages".
- systems with longer during outages probably won't be responsible for problems that just popped up, so in a first glance you probably can ignore them.
Unfortunally I don't have a "great solution" available for this. It's just a hint that there are good functionalities that I will miss with the donut solution.
One thing that might help: to my experience in every large environment you will have (sometimes a lot of...) systems that are unavailable for some unspecified time. They will appear in those lists mentioned above filling them up. A functionality like putting them into "maintenance mode" with the (configurable?) possibility not to show them in those lists on the start page might be a help to keep the lists smaller.
The difference between the "maintenance mode" I know from other monitoring systems and scheduled outages or setting them to unmanaged is that
- planned outages have a limited time span
- setting them to unmanaged has an unlimited time span (and will probably be forgotten until the system realy fails without an alarm)
whereas "maintenance mode" is true until the service/system is responding again. If it is responding, the maintenance mode should be cleared automatically and everything like service checks, collecting data, thresholding etc. is up again without additional human actions.
So if there would be the possibility of defining maintenance mode for objects and not to show the services/systems/alarms for objects in maintenance mode the lists might be a lot shorter. I thought I opened an enhancement request for that about 8 years ago, but I can't find it any more. Maybe it was just a discussion between David and me.
-Michael
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://slashdot.org/>! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________ <http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________>
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ <http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ>
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Mailing_List_FAQ
opennms-discuss mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennms-discuss

[Seibold, Michael]

... and thanks for your great work on OpenNMS!