Skip to content
DataMiner Dojo

More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Search in posts
Search in pages
Log in
Menu
  • Updates & Insights
  • Questions
  • Learning
    • E-learning Courses
    • Tutorials
    • Open Classroom Training
    • Certification
      • DataMiner Fundamentals
      • DataMiner Configurator
      • DataMiner Automation
      • Scripts & Connectors Developer: HTTP Basics
      • Scripts & Connectors Developer: SNMP Basics
      • Visual Overview – Level 1
      • Verify a certificate
    • YouTube Videos
    • Solutions & Use Cases
      • Solutions
      • Use Case Library
    • Agility
      • Learn more about Agile
        • Agile Webspace
        • Everything Agile
          • The Agile Manifesto
          • Best Practices
          • Retro Recipes
        • Methodologies
          • The Scrum Framework
          • Kanban
          • Extreme Programming
        • Roles
          • The Product Owner
          • The Agile Coach
          • The Quality & UX Coach (QX)
      • Book your Agile Fundamentals training
      • Book you Kanban workshop
    • >> Go to DataMiner Docs
  • DevOps
    • About the DevOps Program
    • Sign up for the DevOps Program
    • DataMiner DevOps Support
    • Feature Suggestions
  • Downloads
  • Swag Shop
  • PARTNERS
    • Business Partners
    • Technology Partners
  • Contact
    • Sales, Training & Certification
    • DataMiner Support
    • Global Feedback Survey
  • >> Go to dataminer.services

Correlation – Preventing a Rule from Triggering If Another Rule Already Exists

133 views4 days agoCorrelation
7
Catarina Grilo [SLC] [DevOps Enabler]2.75K 15th January 2026 0 Comments

Hi Dojo,

I have two correlation rules, A and B.
In the rule condition for rule B, I want to specify that the rule should trigger a correlated alarm only if an alarm for rule A does not exist.

Is it possible to achieve this?

Laurens Vercruysse [SLC] [DevOps Advocate] Answered question 4 days ago

1 Answer

  • Active
  • Voted
  • Newest
  • Oldest
0
Laurens Vercruysse [SLC] [DevOps Advocate]431 Posted 4 days ago 0 Comments

Hi Catarina,

As discussed, I do not believe correlation is suited to this type of interaction.

Rather, I do believe you would benefit from making correlation rule A and B mutually exclusive by altering the correlation rule to be as restrictive as possible.

If there must be an overlap, I believe alternatives can be offered to indicate when the conditions for rule A are met (e.g. properties).

However, I believe this would be subject to a consultancy ticket as this is an implementation which would need a good design and validation afterwards.

Laurens Vercruysse [SLC] [DevOps Advocate] Answered question 4 days ago
You are viewing 1 out of 1 answers, click here to view all answers.
Please login to be able to comment or post an answer.

My DevOps rank

DevOps Members get more insights on their profile page.

My user earnings

0 Dojo credits

Spend your credits in our swag shop.

0 Reputation points

Boost your reputation, climb the leaderboard.

Promo banner DataMiner DevOps Professiona Program
DataMiner Integration Studio (DIS)
Empower Katas
Privacy Policy • Terms & Conditions • Contact

© 2026 Skyline Communications. All rights reserved.

DOJO Q&A widget

Can't find what you need?

? Explore the Q&A DataMiner Docs

[ Placeholder content for popup link ] WordPress Download Manager - Best Download Management Plugin