# Heartbeat check.response.code multiple values

**URL:** https://discuss.elastic.co/t/heartbeat-check-response-code-multiple-values/177267
**Category:** Beats
**Tags:** heartbeat
**Created:** [April 17, 2019, 10:23am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/heartbeat-check-response-code-multiple-values/177267 "2019-04-17T10:23:49Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Andrew\_Cholakian1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/andrew_cholakian1/32/3612_2.png) [@Andrew\_Cholakian1](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/Andrew_Cholakian1)
#### Post date: [April 22, 2019, 6:03pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/heartbeat-check-response-code-multiple-values/177267/2 "2019-04-22T18:03:38Z")

</div>

@Jugsofbeer I agree this could be improved, or at the very least better documented. The conditions there use the standard beats [condition processors](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/beats/filebeat/current/defining-processors.html), which includes a logical [or](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/beats/filebeat/current/defining-processors.html#condition-or)! So, for your use case:

```auto
- or:
  - equals:  
      http.response.code: 200
  - equals:
      http.response.code: 502
  - equals:
      http.response.code: 503

```

should do the trick.

Perhaps we could still improve the experience by having a new type of equality check other than `equals`. Something like `equals_any: {of: [200, 502, 503], in: 'http.response.code'` which would be more terse.

Thoughts? CC @ruflin

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/heartbeat-check-response-code-multiple-values/177267)._