Hitachi

JP1 Version 12 JP1/Integrated Management 2 - Manager Overview and System Design Guide


12.2.5 Considerations for defining a status change condition for a monitoring group

By defining a status change condition for a monitoring group, you can monitor the system more precisely from a monitoring tree.

For example, in a system such as described below, where processing loads are distributed using a load balancer, an error on a lower-level node does not necessarily result in a problem in the higher-level monitoring group. In this type of system with special conditions, you can manage the system status more accurately by defining a status change condition for the monitoring group.

Note that the following restrictions apply when you define a status change condition for a monitoring group.

Organization of this subsection

(1) Examples of defining a status change condition for a monitoring group

In the following example, the load-balancing system shown below is being monitored in a monitoring tree. Load-balancing system in this context means a system that uses a load balancer to distribute processing loads.

Figure 12‒24: Example of monitoring from a tree view

[Figure]

The terms used in the explanation below have the following meaning:
  • Web system: Monitoring group (Web system)

  • Load-balancing system: Monitoring group (load-balancing system)

  • Server X: Monitoring object (server X)

The following conditions apply:

A Web system problem is assumed when the processing loads of 60% or more (three or more) of the five servers that make up the Web system have reached a Warning threshold.

Consider the following approach to relaying the node status when this system is monitored from a tree view.

Figure 12‒25: Example of monitoring from a tree view (relaying the node status)

[Figure]

The status change condition in this example is defined as follows:

Table 12‒8: Example of defining a status change condition for a monitoring group

Node name

Status change condition for monitoring group

Status

Child node status#

Comparison condition

Load-balancing system

Error

Warning

Percentage: 60% or more

or

Count: 3 or more

#: The status setting here includes statuses of higher priority. For example, an Error setting includes Emergency, Alert, and Critical statuses.

With these settings, as long as less than 60% of the servers (three of the five servers) are in Warning status or worse, the status of the load-balancing system and Web system remains unchanged from Initial status. Hence, it is not possible to search for status change events from the higher-level load-balancing system or Web system.

If you want to manage status changes in the lower-level monitoring nodes, or to search for status change events in lower-level monitoring nodes from a higher-level monitoring group, we recommend that you define the condition as shown in the following table, for example.

Table 12‒9: Example of defining a status change condition for a monitoring group (recommended)

Node name

Status change condition for monitoring group

Status

Child node status#

Comparison condition

Load-balancing system

Error

Warning

Percentage: 60% or more

or

Count: 3 or more

Warning or Normal

Warning

Percentage: 20% or more

or

Count: 1 or more

#: The status setting here includes statuses of higher priority. For example, an Error setting includes Emergency, Alert, and Critical statuses.

(2) Limitations on defining a status change condition for a monitoring group

Bear in mind the following limitations when you define a status change condition for a monitoring group:

If these two limitations are likely to be issues, define the condition so that any one child node in Error status will change the higher-level monitoring group to Warning status, for example.