Duplicate CIs and IRE
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-04-2024 02:05 AM
Hi Community,
The IRE checks on duplicate CI's using the Identification rules. If a duplicate CI is found a de-duplication task is created. Processing this de-duplication task is dependent of 2 properties: Skip duplicates and Duplicate threshold (default=5).
When Skip duplicates=false (ie duplicates are processed) but the number of duplicates of a single CI is above the threshold, not a single duplicate is processed.
Questions I have:
- What is the best practice to deal with CIs that have more than, in this use-case, 5 duplicates?
- Are de-duplication tasks auto closed when they are processed? So are open de-duplication tasks usable for duplicate reporting?
Looking forward to your responses,
Best regards,
Ed
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-04-2024 03:56 AM
HI @Ed Laar ,
The best practices are use the Host Class to merger the CI if you received the 5 Duplicates Class, Also make sure your IRE rule are configured properly, Please check once that as well.
Also De-duplication task are not closed , we have to manually needs to close those De-duplications task.
Please appreciate the efforts of community contributors by marking appropriate response as Mark my Answer Helpful or Accept Solution this may help other community users to follow correct solution in future.
Thanks
AJ
Linkedin Profile:- https://www.linkedin.com/in/ajay-kumar-66a91385/
ServiceNow Community Rising Star 2024
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-08-2024 01:22 AM
Hi Ajay.
Thanks for your reply. At least one topic is clear: De-duplication tasks are NOT closed automatically when the de-duplication work is done: Thanks for that answer.
Not clear is the topic on duplicate CIs when there are more duplicates than the threshold for duplicates: When the threshold is 5 but there are 12 duplicates:
Nothing happens or is a de-duplication task created but no de-duplication activities are done automatically? What is the best practice to deal with these 12 duplicates?
Is it possible to run the identification rules to check the CMDB on duplicates so pro-active de-duplication actions can be triggered?
Thanks,
Ed
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-08-2024 06:59 AM
Hi @Ed Laar ,
you must need to manually remediate the De-duplication task , Also please check the threshold as De-duplication task as well as CI tagging based on IRE rules only, There is nothing related to threshold.
As If multiple CI having CI Serial Number or IP or any Identifier which mentioned in IRE Rules based on that Must be CI tagged to De-duplication task, Please verify the IRE rule to resolve this CI for Particular CI types.
Please appreciate the efforts of community contributors by marking appropriate response as Mark my Answer Helpful or Accept Solution this may help other community users to follow correct solution in future.
Thanks
AJ
Linkedin Profile:- https://www.linkedin.com/in/ajay-kumar-66a91385/
ServiceNow Community Rising Star 2024
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎04-09-2024 07:32 AM
Sorry Ajay but I do not clearly understand what you mean.
My understanding: De-duplication tasks should be resolved/ closed manually.
Sorry again but all the rest is unclear. Let me try again:
What I understand from the docs there is a default threshold on automatic processing of duplicate CIs identified using the Identification rules during the Identification phase. This works if there are not more duplicate CI's as set in the threshold. When there are more duplicate CI's (ie more CIs that are identified with an identification rule) than the threshold what happens in that case? Is a de-duplication task created? Automatic processing is not done in this case.
Looking forward to your reply,
Ed