This content has been marked as final. Show 7 replies
Have you tried adding all of the targets you want to monitor to a Group and using the Dashboard for that group?
We create Groups based on Line of Business, Application the DB (and Targets) support, and for specific managers. Most of them don't know, or want to know (don't blame them), the actual DB names they want to see them by Application Name. So we create groups of targets based on the application they support.
-- PS: You might check out MPCUI Framework (http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E24628_01/doc.121/e25159/mgt_gui.htm#sthref253) too. I haven't used it yet but it looks promising. Maybe you could develop your own page?
added MPCUI link
MD5 is used during x509 certificate generation in pre-12c environments.
But, starting 12c, we use SHA-2 (512) algorithm for our certificates - there is no dependency on MD5 based certs for new installs.
For 12c upgrade installs, the customer may still have MD5 based certificates as they were created in older releases.
For such upgrade scenarios, EM supports replacing OOTB certificate with certificates of their choice.
Thanks for the suggestion but maybe I did not state the requirement fully.
We want the main performance monitor page, the HA console page and a couple of dashboards displaying a Development group and a Production group on the same screen - a 46" plasma hanging from the ceiling in sight of the whole DBA team - all day long, without timeouts.
So Group dashboards do not really meet the need.
Hmm, the mystery deepens. The guy who did the 12c install is on leave, but we got a clean machine for the "upgrade". I thought he had done the install from scratch.
I know we could use a 3rd party certificate but I'm not asking my boss to approve a few hundred dollars a year just so we can avoid clicking "ignore warning message".
I'll try and find out if this was an upgrade. I don't believe it was, but the browser displays the signature hash algorithm as MD5.
Richard, maybe I didn't make this clear, but the problem I'm having is with Chrome. IE8 blithely accepts the MD5 certificate - suspect since 1996, formally broken from 2004 - without needing any of what's described in your StackOverflow reference.
Chrome is correctly issuing a weak certificate warning due to use of MD5 in the EM certificate. It's IE8 that needs fixing to reject weak certificates, not a workaround to make it accept them.