locked
Naming of MP's, Rules RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hello together,

    maybe this is a strange question but I am currently looking for good examples regarding naming conventions for own Management Packs, Monitors, Rules etc. The reason why I am asking about it is that all my tries looked fine firsthand but after a while they were to complicated or simply not usable for day by day business (to long, to cryptic etc.).

    Maybe someone can help me out here or just give me a clue from his experience.

    Thank you,

    M.

    Monday, October 11, 2010 7:08 PM

Answers

  • Hi,

    I guess there is a lot of ideas around this. A idea could be

    For own rules/monitors

    Organization - Service - Description for example "Contoso - HR APP - Rule for event ID 100"

    then for MPs I often try to build the structure in one sealed MP, including for example all classes, this could be named for example Contoso.PetShop.Library , then a unseal MP that includes everything that we need to adapt, named for example Contoso.PetShop.Configuration


    Anders Bengtsson | Microsoft PFE | blog at http://www.contoso.se
    Monday, October 11, 2010 7:20 PM
  • I always like to keep display names as short as possible, but describing what we're monitoring.  Never include threshold type of information in a rule or alert name, because thresholds can be overriden and then the operator might get confused looking at alert context.

    Example

    Rule name:  <performance object\counter> threshold monitor

    Alert: <performance object\counter> exceeded maximum threshold

    The details will be in the alert context.

    For MP naming, I suggest <vendor> <application> <applicatioin major version>

    If the application was developed in-house, consider using just applicaton and major version...or tack on your company name.  I've never been a fan of using company names in MP elements, because everyone at the company knows who they work for. :)


    HTH, Jonathan Almquist - MSFT
    • Proposed as answer by Graham Davies Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:30 AM
    • Marked as answer by Paul KeelyMVP Wednesday, October 20, 2010 3:56 PM
    Tuesday, October 12, 2010 4:21 AM

All replies

  • Hi,

    I guess there is a lot of ideas around this. A idea could be

    For own rules/monitors

    Organization - Service - Description for example "Contoso - HR APP - Rule for event ID 100"

    then for MPs I often try to build the structure in one sealed MP, including for example all classes, this could be named for example Contoso.PetShop.Library , then a unseal MP that includes everything that we need to adapt, named for example Contoso.PetShop.Configuration


    Anders Bengtsson | Microsoft PFE | blog at http://www.contoso.se
    Monday, October 11, 2010 7:20 PM
  • I always like to keep display names as short as possible, but describing what we're monitoring.  Never include threshold type of information in a rule or alert name, because thresholds can be overriden and then the operator might get confused looking at alert context.

    Example

    Rule name:  <performance object\counter> threshold monitor

    Alert: <performance object\counter> exceeded maximum threshold

    The details will be in the alert context.

    For MP naming, I suggest <vendor> <application> <applicatioin major version>

    If the application was developed in-house, consider using just applicaton and major version...or tack on your company name.  I've never been a fan of using company names in MP elements, because everyone at the company knows who they work for. :)


    HTH, Jonathan Almquist - MSFT
    • Proposed as answer by Graham Davies Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:30 AM
    • Marked as answer by Paul KeelyMVP Wednesday, October 20, 2010 3:56 PM
    Tuesday, October 12, 2010 4:21 AM
  • Hi,

    Good point about not including threshold or configuration that can be overwritten. Why I include company name or organization shortening is to easy see what we have created and what is out of the box. It makes it easier to find things when searching and if we need to move MPs it is also easier.


    Anders Bengtsson | Microsoft PFE | blog at http://www.contoso.se
    • Proposed as answer by Graham Davies Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:31 AM
    Tuesday, October 12, 2010 5:25 AM