Re: [opennms-discuss] Provisiond agressiveness...

[Greg P. <gp...@gm...>]

Jon -

Why not pull the XML file down and point the provisiond configuration at
that local file:// url? Seems like you'd be able to build your needed
business rules  into the script you write to pull down the file. You could
even share it on the wiki or perhaps get it added to contrib for future
releases...

Just a thought.

Greg

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Jon Cohn <jo...@co...> wrote:

> Well, for the second time in recent history, provision has dropped all
> devices from a provisioning group since the XML generator on the far side
> generated a XML file with nodes missing.
>
> I can see a few possibilities to reduce this hedaache.
>
> 1. Limit # of adds/remove/deletes that provisiond will do without requiring
> a manual click of syncronization.
> 2. When deleteing nodes, could it be possible to flag the nodes and leave
> them in the RRD and postgress databases  for a period of hours and/or days.
> (I could see keeping for 30 days this data if it could be used for billing
> for example.)
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Storage Efficiency Calculator
> This modeling tool is based on patent-pending intellectual property that
> has been used successfully in hundreds of IBM storage optimization engage-
> ments, worldwide.  Store less, Store more with what you own, Move data to
> the right place. Try It Now!
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427378/
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>