Split Computer CIs into Server and Desktop

Idea ID 1686337

Split Computer CIs into Server and Desktop

It is quite often I get asked, how many servers do we have, how many desktops. It woud be nice if the Desktops and Servers were not lumped together in one CI. The Node is Desktop attribute is not always reliable enough to distinguish between the two. This might need to be split further beyond just Desktop and Server though if there are other iterations that need to be included. 

11 Comments
Honored Contributor.
Honored Contributor.

Based on Operating system (Windows 7, Windows 10) and node_role contains desktop then CI should get populated on desktop/workstation CI Type.

Based on Operating system (Windows 2008, Windows 2012, Windows 2016) and node_role contains server then CI should get populated on server/windows CI Type.

Super Contributor.. Super Contributor..
Super Contributor..

But you also have a myriad of Unix/Linux servers, Redhat, CentOS, Xen servers...

Honored Contributor.
Honored Contributor.

For Unix/Linux desktop, again based on Operating system (Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation, SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15, Citrix XenDesktop 7.15) and node_role contains desktop then CI should get populated on desktop/workstation CI Type.

For Unix/Linux server, again based on Operating system (Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server,  SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15, Citrix XenServer 7.6) and node_role contains server then CI should get populated on unix CI Type.

Micro Focus Expert
Micro Focus Expert
Status changed to: Waiting for Votes

Thank you for sharing your idea! It’s open for comments and kudos, and we’re looking forward to input from the community. Once there is enough community traction, it will be further reviewed by the product team

Micro Focus Expert
Micro Focus Expert
Status changed to: Under Consideration

Thanks for all the votes and comments. We are looking into this as a future product enhancement. Check the notifications box to be emailed if the status changes.

Honored Contributor.. Honored Contributor..
Honored Contributor..

Hi guys,

i think that this is not good idea to split computers by their role (workstation, server etc.) . Currently the data model is over-complicated and another atomization is contra-productive. Moreover currently it is easy distinguish between systems according their node_role attribute. Generally it is not about data model structure - it is about discovery accuracy to be able recognise servers and the other systems (and correctly set note_role attribute, is _virtual attribute and node_is_desktop attribute).  Dear Microfocus add new reports (our servers, our workstations etc.) rather then this. Have a nice day. Ivan

Honored Contributor.
Honored Contributor.

I agree with Ivan, this is a bad idea.

The complications of adding new sub CIT of Windows or even Unix, in regards to identification and reconsiliation.

If you have the same CI's comming in from a multitude of sources, you would have a CI Type Flip/Flop scenario.

Use node_role as suggested, and spent the energy on improving the detection of those values.

Its free for all customers to create own CIT, if its fits there scenario.

Glen

Micro Focus Expert
Micro Focus Expert

fully agree with Ivan and Glen.

if the "Node is Desktop" attribute is not reliable in some situations, it will not help to just add a new CIType. instead the discovery has to be fixed.

Micro Focus Frequent Contributor
Micro Focus Frequent Contributor

Stumbled across that question during a recent customer workshop (and now here).

I copy Daniel, Glen and Ivan: The possibilities are already covered by the data model and the possibilities of the UCMDB. It's just a matter of data and/or discovery quality if it is usable. But this will be just the same, when adding new CITs to the data model, so the goal should be rather: improve the quality of data getting into the UCMDB to make it usable (building a TQL filtering on the relevant attribute is no rocket science afterwards). 

Outstanding Contributor.
Outstanding Contributor.

If you look at other leading ITSM platforms, they all breakout Computers vs. Servers.  If a new user wants to generate a report of desktops, how long would it take them to build a TQL filtering on the relevant attribute vs clicking on "computers" or "desktops" and exporting?

I understand there are multiple ways to accomplish this with TQL's and filtering, but I believe breaking out these CI types makes this system more intuitive.

The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.