[GH-ISSUE #559] Implementing a "warning" status between Success and Fail #405

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-25 23:42:20 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:42:20 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @Ailothaen on GitHub (Sep 6, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/healthchecks/healthchecks/issues/559

Hello,

A feature I particularly like about healthchecks is the ability to signal failures ( https://healthchecks.io/docs/signaling_failures/ ). However, sometimes, a script may end without a critical error, but still have significant conditions that are worthy to be monitored.

I would therefore suggest the creation of a "warning" status, between successes and failures. For example, it would be triggered using an URL like this: https://hc-ping.com/your-uuid-here/warning

A bonus feature about this (but which requires potentially a design change) is to be able to choose which status codes trigger an success condition, and which ones trigger a warning and a failure. So for example, 0 to 10 would be OK, 11 to 20 would be Warning, and everything else be a failure...

Originally created by @Ailothaen on GitHub (Sep 6, 2021). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/healthchecks/healthchecks/issues/559 Hello, A feature I particularly like about healthchecks is the ability to signal failures ( https://healthchecks.io/docs/signaling_failures/ ). However, sometimes, a script may end without a critical error, but still have significant conditions that are worthy to be monitored. I would therefore suggest the creation of a "warning" status, between successes and failures. For example, it would be triggered using an URL like this: `https://hc-ping.com/your-uuid-here/warning` A bonus feature about this (but which requires potentially a design change) is to be able to choose which status codes trigger an success condition, and which ones trigger a warning and a failure. So for example, 0 to 10 would be OK, 11 to 20 would be Warning, and everything else be a failure...

kerem

2026-02-25 23:42:20 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
feature
label

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:42:20 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ep1cman commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2021):

This would be increadibly useful, especially selecting which exit codes are a failure and which are a warning on the backend.

I currently used healthchecks to ensure my daily backups complete using a tool called restic. It will give exit code 1 for fatal errors but 3 for backups that have succeeded but missed some files. It would be great if this could be logged as a warning in healthchecks, but not fail the check.

@ep1cman commented on GitHub (Sep 9, 2021): This would be increadibly useful, especially selecting which exit codes are a failure and which are a warning on the backend. I currently used healthchecks to ensure my daily backups complete using a tool called `restic`. It will give exit code `1` for fatal errors but `3` for backups that have succeeded but missed some files. It would be great if this could be logged as a warning in healthchecks, but not fail the check.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:42:20 +03:00

Author

Owner

@BerriJ commented on GitHub (Jan 13, 2022):

This is a duplicate of https://github.com/healthchecks/healthchecks/issues/227

However, I'm also eagerly waiting for this feature.

@BerriJ commented on GitHub (Jan 13, 2022): This is a duplicate of https://github.com/healthchecks/healthchecks/issues/227 However, I'm also eagerly waiting for this feature.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 23:42:20 +03:00

Author

Owner

@cuu508 commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2022):

Indeed it's a duplicate, closing.

@cuu508 commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2022): Indeed it's a duplicate, closing.

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-25 23:44:16 +03:00

[PR #405] [CLOSED] Localization support #954