1 of 1 people found this helpful
They will be different nodes in the CMDB ADDM dataset. The Group (Static application) and BusinessApplicationInstance (CAM generated) are identified differently.
You define a Static App model by creating a group with your host/SI nodes and putting StaticApp: at the beginning of the name.
Then a syncmapping pattern creates a BMC_Application CI in the CMDB with the same name, but without the "StaticApp:".
It relates all the nodes in the group directly to the Application CI.
With CAM, you start with an Application, add functional components (e.g. Web Servers, App Servers, Database) and tell it which nodes to include in each functional component. When syncmapping runs, it pushes that entire heirarchy into the CMDB, creating a BMC_Appllcation CI for the Application and a BMC_ConcreteCollection for each functional component. The relationships are node to FC, FC to App instead of node to App as in the StaticApp.
So bottom line: it's not so much of a conversion as it is a migration. You create the CAM app and destroy the group (or just rename it without the StaticApp: prefix.
Hope that makes sense.
So i would end up with two Application CIs. Thanks! Clearly not what i would want.
As Tim suggested, it is a Migration. As you create CAM / SAAM models to replace the static models, you should destroy/delete the static models.
I would recommend destroying/deleting the Static model just prior to:
Executing the tpl for the CAM model, or
Publishing the SAAM model.
to avoid having duplicate BAI's in Discovery and subsequently in the CMDB (if that is your ultimate destination)
If the BAI's are different enough to be able to disitinguish them, i.e., Static looks different enough from CAM/SAAM, you could keep both for comparison purposes, and gradually remove the Static models.