HP uCMDB and HP Service Manager Federation - Duplicate CI
Our current integration to Service Manager creates duplicate CIs. One reason is due to "Installed Software" appearing on multiple servers. We want to treat "Installed Software" as CIs (Not attributes) in Service Manager i.e. we want the ability to view which servers are affected when specific Installed software is changed. When pushing the data to Service Manager, the 1st occurrence would be correct and every subsequent entry would be suffixed with "_" a rolling number. When displaying the structure one would always show the structure of the 1st loaded CI, unless one specifically select one suffixed with "_" and a number, but it will never show all servers that run the installed software in question.
It is easy enough to view this in HP uCMDB, but how does one enable a Service Manager user to view this?
One thought is to group installed software, example as follows:
Installed Software Global ID Related to Server
DOT NET 12345 Server1
DOT NET 24680 Server2
DOT NET 36913 Server3
DOT NET (Grouping of above) 11111 Server1, Server2, Server3
Push DOT NET (Group) to Service Manager
Please advise possible solution for this scenario. We were informed that federation would remove these duplicate CIs, but we do not understand how this would happen.
P.S. This thread has been moved from Application Perf Mgmt (BAC / BSM) Support and News Forum to CMS and Discovery Support and News Forum. -HP Forum Moderator
I am trying to push CIs from uCMDB to Service manager, however I'm not able to succeed in creating Installed Softwares as CIs in SM.
Could you please assist in doing that??
SM resolves on the name attribute so if it sees one that exists it will create another one with an '_' and number.
If you replicate Hosts and related CIs you must also replicate the relationships.
These are seperate Jobs in the IP for SM so make sure you activate them all and confirm they are working.
Check the integration TQLs to review what you're actually sending and the sm.log file to review how it's being handled.
The OOtB SM IP is pretty basic and you may need to modify it some, depending on version.
Sorry I don't have access to an example.