SCOM override is not effective

László Alföldi 1 Reputation point
2021-08-02T10:04:23.677+00:00

Hi,

I have an issue with an override implemented as follows:

  • In a sealed management pack "MP-A" a disabled rule "Rule-A" is created. Its target is the "Microsoft.Windows.Library!Microsoft.Windows.Server.DC.Computer" class.
  • In a sealed management pack "MP-B" a class "Class-B" is defined using the hosted "Microsoft.Windows.Library!Microsoft.Windows.LocalApplication" base class.
  • "Class-B" instances are discovered successfully.
  • In a non-sealed management pack "MP-C" a rule property override is defined that enables the rule "MP-A!Rule-A" for the class "MP-B!Class-B".

I found that the rule "MP-A!Rule-A" is not effective on instances of "MP-B!Class-B" class.

Why the rule is not effective?

Operations Manager
Operations Manager
A family of System Center products that provide infrastructure monitoring, help ensure the predictable performance and availability of vital applications, and offer comprehensive monitoring for datacenters and cloud, both private and public.
1,419 questions
0 comments No comments
{count} votes

6 answers

Sort by: Most helpful
  1. CyrAz 5,181 Reputation points
    2021-08-02T10:35:01.763+00:00

    I would say the override is not working because MP-B!Class-B does not host Microsoft.Windows.Library!Microsoft.Windows.Server.DC.Computer, it's actually the opposite.

    0 comments No comments

  2. László Alföldi 1 Reputation point
    2021-08-02T10:46:53.723+00:00

    @CyrAz : What do you mean by "it's actually the opposite"?

    0 comments No comments

  3. CyrAz 5,181 Reputation points
    2021-08-02T10:52:53.56+00:00

    Microsoft.Windows.Server.DC.Computer uses Microsoft.Windows.Server.Computer as its base class, so an instance of Microsoft.Windows.Server.DC.Computer is also an instance of Microsoft.Windows.Server.Computer (and therefore also an instance of Microsoft.Windows.Computer).
    And Microsoft.Windows.Computer hosts Microsoft.Windows.LocalApplication.

    0 comments No comments

  4. CyrAz 5,181 Reputation points
    2021-08-02T11:00:37.013+00:00

    What you could do is create a group of Windows Computers that contains an instance of Class-B, and then create the override for that group. That should work.
    Here is how you create groups with containment rules : https://kevinholman.com/2020/07/09/how-to-create-a-scom-group-of-disks-that-are-related-to-an-application-using-contained-and-contains/
    (except you will use Windows.Computer instead of LogicalDisk)

    0 comments No comments

  5. László Alföldi 1 Reputation point
    2021-08-09T14:14:13.603+00:00

    Thanks for the response.

    Using SCOM groups is not an option, I try to avoid using SCOM Groups due to the load it puts on SCOM - this is why I tried to create classes and override the monitoring on them.

    The workaround solution was to change the base of the classes to a corresponding base class - for example if the target of the monitor to override is the "Microsoft.Windows.Server.DC.Computer" class then the base class of "MP-B!Class-B" is also the "Microsoft.Windows.Server.DC.Computer" class.

    It seems now the overrides work as expected.

    Anyway I need to work on it to understand how that override option "For all objects of another class..." - that is available on SCOM GUI - actually works, what kind of classes can be used effectively.
    It is a bit confusing for me now, because when I targeted a monitor directly to the class with "Microsoft.Windows.LocalApplication" as base class, the monitoring worked fine. But when I tried to use this class as an override target, it did not work. It's weird.

    0 comments No comments