CMDB Setup Global vs Local

[love2succeed]

Hi. 

We have many global CIs (let's say Servers) that are associated with specific sites/locations. We want to know how should we set up the CIs. Should we associate the CI's with a Site? or configure the CIs as a global and then a relationship to a specific site as well.

It is very unclear to us what is the best approach to take? And if there are any advantages of one approach over the other.

Best,

Kathy

[Oddeoh]

---

To start out, I would always start with CI’s linked to Location records (even if they are “sites” conceptually). The terminology of “Sites” is fairly universal, but I have not seen a lot of people using it in the Sites table or need to.  The use of defined Location Types [cmn_location_type] referenced by location records are best used to define (Sites, Buildings, Regions, Cubicles, Rooms, etc.) within Locations.

Since Location records can be hierarchical (parent-child) with a Location parent containing child Locations.  This gives the ability to create “logical” locations containing “physical” locations or vice-versa (many to one, one to many) depending on your modeling needs and record volume in one Location table. You can also use the relational UI views to see the Location table records hierarchically tree’d out as you have defined for free.

Determining how to link CI’s around the use of locations is mostly about your organization's use of Locations conceptually.  

• Assume that whatever your location tree or hierarchical model is, or will be, that a CI could be or should be linked to any of those location records up and down the tree.  Especially as you start to enrich or mature your data, you want the flexibility to associate to what you do know and refine it later to get more quality and start associating it lower down the Location tree as needed.
  
  
• Know your key use-cases and decision support or operational needs you will have for you CI’s and at what level of granularity you need to be able to better manage, monitor, report, support, ship, audit, etc.
  
  
• What is the most granular level of “location” grouping or association you need in those sites for your CI’s? 

CI’s Sites, Regions, Campuses, Buildings, Data Centers, Rooms, Zones, Cubicles, Racks or just a Physical Site Location? All of the above?

• What is the highest level “location” or “site” grouping entity location type you need? 

Earth, NA, EMEA, West Coast, Site, etc.? 

• Do you follow ordained Facilities sites of “DC23A” = 1122 Main Street USA”?

Create tree view of your location model for reference, share it out, and start aligning and enforcing where things will link to in order to enhance your CMDB’s data quality. Contributing to poor CMDB data quality is usually not having a published model and the rules of where and when to use your location types properly.