Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ignore objects in breakdown reports that have not yet been monitored in the selected period #51

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 18, 2022

Conversation

lippserd
Copy link
Member

@lippserd lippserd commented Aug 19, 2021

Previously, objects that had not yet been monitored in the selected period were incorrectly reported with a SLA of 100 percent.

ref/NC/725496

refs #57

@lippserd lippserd added the bug Something isn't working label Aug 19, 2021
@cla-bot cla-bot bot added the cla/signed label Aug 19, 2021
@nilmerg
Copy link
Member

nilmerg commented Mar 18, 2022

Misses support for postgresql. Should we merge anyway?

@lippserd
Copy link
Member Author

Misses support for postgresql. Should we merge anyway?

Yeah, go for it!

To be honest, I don't know why a future state should be used for a
certain period in the past.
Peviously, the entire time was simply returned as 100 percent
available. This applies to objects that have not yet been
monitored in the selected period.
@nilmerg nilmerg force-pushed the sla-100-although-not-monitored branch from dcf2ab7 to 067daa8 Compare March 18, 2022 16:36
@nilmerg nilmerg merged commit ad179e9 into master Mar 18, 2022
@nilmerg nilmerg deleted the sla-100-although-not-monitored branch March 18, 2022 16:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working cla/signed ref/NC
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants