[ZBX-5319] Column "Delay" calculated incorrectly in action configuration form if we use individual "Escalation period" for operations. Unclear strings. Created: 2012 Jul 13 Updated: 2017 May 30 Resolved: 2013 Dec 13 |
|
Status: | Closed |
Project: | ZABBIX BUGS AND ISSUES |
Component/s: | Documentation (D), Frontend (F) |
Affects Version/s: | 1.8.14, 2.1.0 |
Fix Version/s: | 1.8.16rc1, 2.0.3rc2, 2.1.0 |
Type: | Incident report | Priority: | Blocker |
Reporter: | Oleksii Zagorskyi | Assignee: | Unassigned |
Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
Labels: | delay, escalations, operations | ||
Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
Original Estimate: | Not Specified |
Attachments: | escalation_no_override.png incorrect_delay_18.png incorrect_delay_20.png | ||||||||
Issue Links: |
|
Description |
(1) Server is ok - it execute operations according to individual operation delays - just has been tested. (2) To fix these unclear strings I **strongly** suggest to chance them: Also - documentation is not perfect in this area and has to be improved. |
Comments |
Comment by Oleksii Zagorskyi [ 2012 Jul 13 ] |
As a proof, 1.8.14 server side (from attached screenshot): In an alert for the {ESC.HISTORY} macro I see (6rd step): (described in |
Comment by Alexey Fukalov [ 2012 Jul 16 ] |
dev branch: svn://svn.zabbix.com/branches/dev/ZBX-5319 |
Comment by richlv [ 2012 Jul 16 ] |
(3) let's finally document how this is supposed work, as apparently code is not documentation... martins-v The total of changes resulting from this issue reflected in:
RESOLVED. sasha great work! CLOSED |
Comment by Oleksii Zagorskyi [ 2012 Jul 16 ] |
(4) I got additional awesome idea. Then it will look much "cleaner", try to imagine it. <zalex> accepted, CLOSED |
Comment by Alexander Vladishev [ 2012 Jul 16 ] |
1.8 successfully tested! <zalex> 1.8 GUI fix additionally confirmed. |
Comment by Alexander Vladishev [ 2012 Jul 17 ] |
2.0 is successfully tested! Before merge, please review my changes in r28912. |
Comment by Alexey Fukalov [ 2012 Jul 17 ] |
Fixed in pre-1.8.15rc1 r28902, pre-2.0.2rc1 r28913, pre-2.1.0rc1 r28914 |
Comment by Oleksii Zagorskyi [ 2012 Jul 17 ] |
2.0 successfully tested. Guys, THANK YOU for all accepted suggestions !!! |
Comment by richlv [ 2012 Jul 17 ] |
hmm... reminder about (3) also, i don't see anywhere a description of full changes for this issue - for example, was anything else done besides fixing the bug (as indicated in commit messages) ? |
Comment by Alexander Vladishev [ 2012 Jul 17 ] |
(5) Cannot save "Discovery" and "Auto registration" actions. <Vedmak> RESOLVED |
Comment by richlv [ 2012 Jul 17 ] |
(6) see escalation_no_override.png looks like override isn't working properly. operation on steps 6-9 is supposed to override till step 9, thus making step 10 happen on minute 20 or so, and step 23 would be more in the future. if that matters, operation 6-9 was initially added as 6-7, and after all other operations were added, extended to 6-9. would be useful to re-test all override scenarios (multiple overrides with different intervals etc) <Vedmak> for overlapping steps, minimum period is taken for calculations. You have default period 60 sec, so 300sec interval will be only for 6th and 7th steps. <Sasha> Vedmak is right! Row #3 overrides steps 8 and 9 from row #2. <richlv> errrr, that doesn't make sense. the custom period should override the default, and minimum rule should only kick in when we have two custom override periods... <zalex> would be cool to have some answer here and close this sub-issue before the writing documentation changes. <Sasha> I think current solution is better. Rich's solution is too confused. <richlv> but that was what frontend did before these changes... was that also a bug ? <zalex> heh, I agree with Rich. To implement the "correct logic" ("higher custom" has a priority over "lower default") probably we need to fix also server side. <martins-v>...so apparently with overlaping steps, the duraton of the one with the shorter period is taken as the step duration. So here 8-9 period overrides 6-9 period simply because 60 seconds is less than 300 (not because 60 sec is the default...ie it would be the same with 61-299 seconds.. BUT not with 301+ seconds, then the 300 would override being the shorter one). If this really is true (and remains so) it should be documented, of course. martins-v Precedence of the shortest of overlapping durations documented:
RESOLVED. sasha CLOSED |
Comment by Alexander Vladishev [ 2012 Jul 18 ] |
Successfully tested. |
Comment by Alexey Fukalov [ 2012 Jul 18 ] |
Fixed in pre-2.0.2rc1 r28966, pre-2.1.0rc1 r28967 |
Comment by Oleksii Zagorskyi [ 2012 Jul 18 ] |
another reminder for (3) REOPENED |
Comment by Oleg Ivanivskyi [ 2013 May 27 ] |
Met several times in the forum, as the phrase from the documentation "Default escalation period" is confusing users (should be "Default operation step duration"). They can't find this parameter in Zabbix 2.0.6 and configure escalation. |