1 2 3 Previous Next 36 Replies Latest reply on Apr 3, 2020 11:41 AM by Nick Caulfield

    Recon issue with specific computer system ci

    Gajanand Patil
      Share This:

      Hi All,

       

      I am checking that few of the servers are not reconciling. I have checked the recon rules and all are as per BMC standard rule. Ideally these should reconciled all the servers. But for few servers are not getting identifying by identify rule. I checked in the recon debug logs as well and not getting why these records are not processing in the identify activity. Below I can see in the logs:

       

       

       

      <DETAILS > <TID: 0000031988> /* Fri Mar 20 2020 10:45:18.5950 */ Started identifying instance <class = BMC.CORE:BMC_ComputerSystem, instance id = OI-XXXX>

      <INFO    > <TID: 0000031988> /* Fri Mar 20 2020 10:45:18.5960 */ Updating ID error code for instance <OI-XXXX> of class <BMC.CORE:BMC_ComputerSystem> in dataset

      <INFO    > <TID: 0000031988> /* Fri Mar 20 2020 10:45:18.6720 */ Processed instance without finding a match for instance <OI-XXXX> for class <BMC.CORE:BMC_ComputerSystem> in dataset

      <INFO    > <TID: 0000031988> /* Fri Mar 20 2020 10:45:18.6730 */ Cannot identify the instance of class <BMC.CORE:BMC_ComputerSystem> with instance id <OI-XXXX> in dataset <BMC.ADDM>

      <INFO    > <TID: 0000031988> /* Fri Mar 20 2020 10:45:18.6740 */ Cancelled the processing of rest of the sub-tree for instance of class = BMC.CORE:BMC_ComputerSystem and instance id = OI-XXXX

      <DETAILS > <TID: 0000011268> /* Fri Mar 20 2020 10:45:18.6750 */ Finished waiting

       

       

      OI-XXXX is the instance ID.

       

      Is there any other way to reconciled it ?

       

      Regards,

      Gajanan

        • 1. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
          Stefan Hall

          There is no other way. Systems must first be identified and only then can the merge follow.

           

          I find the recon log a bit more meaningful. Maybe you could look there again.

           

          Spontaneously a few questions :

           

          - Can your identify activity create new IDs?

          - where did the working systems first come from? Which job?

          1 of 1 people found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
            Gajanand Patil

            Hi Stefan

             

            Yes, identify activity create a new id ( i mean generate new id check box is checked)

            Data is in ADDM dataset.

             

             

            Regards,

            Gajanan

            • 3. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
              Gajanand Patil

              While digging more on this issue, I have found that one of recon rule is failing and might be because of that identification activity is completing successfully.

              Failing rule is identifying based on Domain, Hostname and isVirtual. I am seeing that with same qualification like Domain, Hostname and isVirtual there are 3 entries present :

               

              2 in ASSET Dataset with MAD=Yes

              1 in ADDM Dataset with MAD=No

               

              ADDM entry needs to identify which is failing.

               

              Regards,

              Gajanan

              • 4. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                Nick Caulfield

                Normally the ADDM dataset is reconciled using the standard rules which are set to generate IDs

                Do you have custom rules or have you edited the standard ones via the back end forms?

                1 of 1 people found this helpful
                • 5. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                  Gajanand Patil

                  Nope. We are using the standard recon rules only. No custom rule is added.

                   

                   

                  Regards,

                  Gajanan

                  • 6. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                    Nick Caulfield

                    If you are using standard rules, then you may have to look again at the "create ID" check box because it's probably the one which applies to the target dataset.

                     

                    One thing you can do it temporarily add a qualification which means the reconciliation job only applies to a single CI such as

                     

                    'InstanceId' = "OI-..."

                     

                    and then switch the logging to debug mode

                    1 of 1 people found this helpful
                    • 7. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                      Gajanand Patil

                      Hi Nick,

                       

                      Generate IDs check box is checked in the identification activity. There are 5 standard recon rules for the computer system form. I have checked in the logs and found that one rule is failing where the identification is based on Domain, Hostname and isVirtual. I am seeing that with same qualification like Domain, Hostname and isVirtual there are 3 entries present :

                       

                      2 in ASSET Dataset with MAD=Yes

                      1 in ADDM Dataset with MAD=No Which actually needs to identify during the recon job

                       

                      Regards,

                      Gajanan

                      • 8. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                        Stefan Hall

                        Then the two entries in ASSET are your problem. The rule may only find one to be successful.

                         

                        Are both ASSET IDs the same device? If so, you could manually change the hostname of one of them, e.g. add "_old".

                         

                        Then your job will only find one entry and identify the new entry in the ADDM dataset.

                         

                        Then you have to think about better rules. In my experience the OOB rules are only good as learning examples.

                        1 of 1 people found this helpful
                        • 9. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                          Gajanand Patil

                          Hi Stefan,

                           

                          For less number of records is fine where we can do changes in hostname manually for the ASSET records which have MAD=yes. But how we can fix this for permanent ?

                           

                          The rule which is failing is

                           

                          'HostName' != $\NULL$ AND 'HostName' = $HostName$ AND 'Domain' != $\NULL$ AND 'Domain' = $Domain$ AND ((($isVirtual$ = "No") AND ('isVirtual' = "No" OR 'isVirtual' = $\NULL$)) OR (($isVirtual$ = "Yes") AND ('isVirtual' = "Yes" OR 'isVirtual' = $\NULL$)) OR (($isVirtual$ = $\NULL$) AND ('isVirtual' = "Yes" OR 'isVirtual' = "No" OR 'isVirtual' = $\NULL$)))

                           

                           

                          By adding which qualification we can fix this ? Any idea ?

                           

                           

                          Regards,

                          Gajanan

                          • 10. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                            Stefan Hall

                            That's what I had in mind, a workaround for the quick correction

                             

                            Now for the rule: the only halfway clear part is the hostname and this seems to be not enough in your case. We often still use the serial number as a distinction.

                             

                            But it is not possible to tell the exact solution from a distance. Therefore you have to know the data. Look at the faulty CIs and find out the difference. What makes your CIs unique?

                            1 of 1 people found this helpful
                            • 11. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                              Todd Lazar

                              If you are using standard rules which are designed to auto identify (new Recon Id if no match found), then it is failing because of duplicates.  This could be duplicates in your BMC.ASSET dataset or in the case of what you have mentioned - duplicates in your discovery (BMC.ADDM) dataset.  Handling deletes is a very crucial part of reconciliation and it is a powerful feature of the Discovery (ADDM) process.  You just have to ensure that they are processed.  This is the suggestion:
                              - Make sure that you merge the logical deleted (Mark as Deleted = "Yes"). 

                              - Purge your Discovery (BMC.ADDM) dataset.  This will allow the duplicate CI to reconcile. It is best to use the "Verify in Target Dataset" option here to ensure that the corresponding BMC.ASSET record is updated as deleted).

                               

                              You could add an additional purge of the discovery dataset with a qualification of Recon ID = 0  or the "Unidentified" purge instance option and remove the Verify in Target Dataset option.  This will clear out anything that is logically deleted that hasn't been reconciled.

                               

                              Hope this helps!

                              • 12. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                                Gajanand Patil

                                Hi Stefan,

                                 

                                Yes you are right, even for temporary purpose we can do the manual changes. But for the large scale I am also worried. Below attributes are used to make unique identification:

                                Hostname

                                Domain

                                SerialNumber

                                TokenID

                                isVirtual

                                 

                                I am thinking that If I add Mad !=Yes and Dataset=ADDM then how it will behave.

                                 

                                Regards,

                                Gajanan

                                • 13. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                                  Stefan Hall
                                  I am thinking that If I add Mad !=Yes and Dataset=ADDM then how it will behave.

                                   

                                  Better not, identification doesn't work that way. You identify CIs in the ADDM dataset against your ASSET dataset and check all rules against the ASSET dataset.

                                   

                                  Also, you don't want to create a new entry in the ASSET dataset for every reappearing CI. You need to find something to recognize the same CI as the same and give the CI the same recon id in the ADDM dataset. This is the only way to revive a CI in ASSET (MAD = NO).

                                   

                                  I'm sitting in the backyard right now and I can't access the system. Can you just post the complete rules for this class  There should be several rules and a test order (priority).

                                  2 of 2 people found this helpful
                                  • 14. Re: Recon issue with specific computer system ci
                                    Gajanand Patil

                                    Hi Stefan,

                                     

                                    I think this approach will not work, because I find one more scenario where there are 3 records present:

                                     

                                    2 ADDM & 1 Asset

                                    1-ADDM record reconciled with Asset and is in active status ( MAD=No)

                                    Remaining ADDM record is not reconciled as it is not qualifying in the identification as all these 3 records have same Hostname, Domain and isVirtual value.

                                     

                                    If I add TokenID or serial number in this rule ?

                                     

                                    Regards,

                                    Gajanan

                                    1 2 3 Previous Next