Thanks for noticing. The original intention of application modelling was to model connected software and their impacts. Thus, we decided to allow only in the Software-Connected view (you may also notice that the Infrastructure View does not allow to create an application model either). However, I can see how it could be useful in such a scenario. I will raise an issue to track this point.
1 of 1 people found this helpful
It is intentional that application modeling is only available in the "Software - Connected" focus. You are right that it was available from the "Software" focus in 11.0, but that is just because we renamed the 11.0 "Software" to be "Software - Connected" in 11.1. There is no new restriction. The new "Software" focus in 11.1 is a simpler view that does not follow any connections.
The reason we only support application modeling from the "Software - Connected" focus is that the algorithm used for the visualization is the same as the algorithm used to dynamically update models as the discovered data changes. You have to start from that focus, because otherwise the model will change in unexpected ways when you scan.
We added new features in 11.1 to allow you to suppress heavily-connected relationships and common but uninteresting software in the "Software - Connected" focus and, therefore, in application models.
As a hint to handle these heavily-connected situations, I recommend that you view them in "Force Directed" layout, because that gives you a better idea of the groupings of nodes, and helps you spot candidates for defining exclusion rules. The "Impact" layout you have in your screenshots often works well once you have trimmed the data, but when you have a lot of nodes, it becomes unreasonably wide.
- actually i have few points on this further:
1. In software connected it shows all the communications with all other servers,applications that i'm really not interested to keep into my particular application. So lot of works for me to remove them and review.
2. "Review Suggested" option is little bit annoying as every day it keeps adding the nodes into my already built applications and there no option to "Discard" the suggested changes. i have to Accept the changes that i really don't want. So every time i'm giving my double effort to manually remove node given by Review suggested which i'm not really interested in.
3. why there's No option of discarding the Review suggested changes into my built application?? or there's one which i'm not able to find out??
Overall addm v11.1 making my life pretty difficult to create application models. few features are Good but few are not...
We have the same feeling for the applicatoin maping ..
It will be great to have an option to lock the application when we have publish it and avoiding minor change that the system do without explanation.
We passed more less 1 hours every day to control what has been change in the applications model
I still prefer using CAM to model applications because I trust the Functional Component queries, if built properly, will add/remove hosts automatically without my involvement. I love the idea in SAAM that I can graphically see my CIs and then group them into the model. This is also a time saver when building the models, but with issues mentioned in this discussion and other observations with SAAM in the past, I'm still using CAM.
I wish modeling in BMC Discovery enabled us to visually see CIs and relationships as we see in SAAM, but still build Functional Components similar to CAM regardless of what CI types were selected (hosts, storage, load balancers, VIPs, software, database, whatever). This would overcome the current limitations of CAM (i.e. unable to include load balancers) and still leverage the really nice graphic tool of SAAM to make models.
I simply want to build models, trust they work without extra involvement, and when I learn of an application going through change, I will include steps to validate/edit the model definition once the application has been changed.
there other limitations as well -
(1) You can't generate a PDF report for your application built by SAAM. i have create a manual group then add the application model to the manual group and generate a PDF report of my application model. Why there's No direct option to generate a PDF report for application ? as my application owner are used to of PDF reports only thru CAM.
(2) Even though when i create a PDF report of SAAM models, it unnecessary includes all unrelated hosts into the report which i have not really mentioned into my model.
If you see below image, you will see difference where "Any State" it actually shows the hosts which i have actually included into my model and the "Published" it shows all related hosts which are communicating with my modelled servers which i have actually NOT included into my model.
So when i generate a PDF it includes all unwanted hosts which my application owner is really not interested in. why are other servers been included into report when i hve not included them into my model?
I had a similar issue when modeling, the connected software visualization was following connections on a discovery agent and showing hundreds of hosts.
I resolved this by using the context sensitive menu and creating a rule on that specific software to not follow connections. The menu item is "Do not follow any connections" and it will create a rule that applies during visualization so you don't have that problem again.