Add parameter sensuclassic::check::check_name #16
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Enables definition of multiple checks with the same name, useful when checks are organized under proxy clients.
|
Opened #19 that is this PR plus also making |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Enables definition of multiple checks with the same name; currently the check name is always derived from the check resource name, but this precludes defining multiple checks with the same name on the same host. This is useful when organizing checks into proxy clients, and is maybe useful for general server-side checks as well, where different clients could get a different check configuration based on the subscription, but with the same name. What do you think?
When the new check_name parameter is omitted, it defaults to the same behavior as before.
I am currently using this patch in production on my Sensu deployment, but I haven't added any automated tests to the codebase - please advise if/where it would be sensible.