Agents not mapping to correct agent group
We have 2 .NET apps with similar names, "Scheduler" and "SchedulerLegacy". The agent names look like this: "Scheduler[SchedulerApp]..." and "SchedulerLegacy[SchedulerLegApp]...". The agents for each app are mapped into their own respective agent groups, but both are mapped using the setting "Agent Name" and the condition "starts with 'Scheduler'". As a result of this, both sets of agents are ending up under the "Scheduler" agent group, with no data under the "SchedulerLegacy" agent group. Will this be resolved by modifying the condition for the Scheduler app to read something like this: Agent Name starts with "Scheduler[" or some similar modification to the conditions of these groups? If yes, can the agent mapping condition be changed without modifying the agents themselves, recycling the app pools, or losing any historical data for those agents?
The "Scheduler[" wouldn't help as the [SchedulerApp] is appended to the end of the agent group after it is connected. andreas.grabner@dynatrace.com is there any sort of priority for agent mapping if not I think that would be a good RFE to be able to change that.
I believe you have at least two options that might work for you:
- Use "equals" with both "Scheduler", and "SchedulerLegacy" to avoid the "starts with" issue
- If they run on different hosts, you can alternatively use the Agent Host as part of the mapping to be more selective
Once you change the mapping, there would need to be an application restart for the new mapping to take effect.
The historical data would remain under the agent groups they are under now, and would then start showing up under the new agent groups after you get the mapping fixed.
HTH,
dave
they are on the same hosts unfortunately... Also, I'm not sure of the reasoning behind this, but we've been advised before to not use the "equals" condition. Do you know of any existing issue or performance cost associated with that option?
I am not aware of any performance issues associated with that option. It is more restrictive and we tend to use "starts with" for flexibility except for when we hit cases of this nature.
Yekaterina,
I'd try changing the mapping rules to 'equals' rather than 'starts with'.
-- Graeme
Thanks for your help everyone!
