Multiple tables for the same components

JordiDG · ‎11-10-2022

I have a question on what tables to use.

Currently I see multiple tables for the same components.

Examples:

1a. cmdb_ci_service_business

1b. cmdb_ci_service (service classification = business)

2a. spm_service_portfolio

2b. service_portfolio

At least they mentioned the following in the ServiceNow Docs for the Technical Services to make it clear:

"Previously, technical services were mapped to the [cmdb_ci_service] table and were classified as “technical services." Starting with the Paris release, technical Services are now mapped to the [cmdb_ci_service_technical] table."

Therefore I can assume it is the same for the 1a and 1b mentioned Business Services (1a being the new way and 1b being the old way). But this is not mentioned clearly in the Docs as they did with the Technical Services and they are even mixing it together, making it more confusing. See picture.

With regards to the service portfolio. "service_portfolio" is mentioned everywhere in the Docs. However, when looking up that table, it does not exist. And if you click on Business Service Portfolio in the application navigator, it will send you to the spm_service_portfolio table.

So what are the correct / best practice tables to use?

Kind regards,

Jordi

EricDohr · ‎11-10-2022

[Service] cmdb_ci_service is a table that extends to other tables, including Business Service [cmdb_ci_service_business], Technical Service [cmdb_ci_service_technical], and more. If a record is created in a child table, the records will be visible in the parent table. ServiceNow originally had the cmdb_ci_service table, and as Service Portfolio Management has grown, the need to differentiate records and have specific tables has increased, resulting in the new tables.

While the child table has similar fields to the parent, you can have unique fields.

If you are focused on Business Services, Technical Services, and Service Offerings, I highly recommend checking out Service Builder, as that will help you create the proper records at the right table. Mark and Caitlin just posted a YouTube video on this topic that may help answer key questions; definitely check it out.

For Service Portfolio Management, a few key tables include

Service Portfolios [spm_service_portfolio] – Where you define portfolios
Taxonomy Layer Definitions [spm_taxonomy_layer_definition] – the layers of a portfolio
Taxonomy nodes [spm_taxonomy_node] – Nodes that align to a layer and a portfolio

You associate Services to Nodes as part of the Service Portfolio Management

Here is a really handy document regarding “ServicePortfolio Management – Process Workshop”

Tables that are extended from Service [cmdb_ci_service]

Note, there are tables that are extended from here such as tables of Application Services

View solution in original post

EricDohr · ‎11-10-2022

Do you happen to have a link to an example? It could be that this is a typo that we would want to give the teams feedback on to address

JordiDG · ‎11-15-2022

1. https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/tokyo-servicenow-platform/page/product/csdm-implementation/concep...

2. https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/tokyo-servicenow-platform/page/product/csdm-implementation/concep...

3. https://docs.servicenow.com/bundle/tokyo-servicenow-platform/page/product/csdm-implementation/concep...

In all of these 3 links the service_portfolio table is mentioned instead of the spm_service_portfolio. So basically everywhere because spm_service_portfolio is mentioned nowhere. The first link mentions it 1 time, the second mentions it in the picture and the third link mentions it even 3 times.

EricDohr · ‎11-15-2022

Thank you, @JordiDG

On the bottom of each docs page there is a feedback button. If you give it a thumbs up or thumbs down, you can provide comments. For those three links, I submitted feedback based on our discussion which will route to the appropriate teams. We appreciate you bringing this up as others may have questions

JordiDG · ‎11-15-2022

Thanks for submitting the feedback! Good to know about the feedback button, I will use it from this point onwards if necessary. And you are welcome 😊

JordiDG · ‎11-16-2022

By the way, one more thing that helped start this confusion in the first place. The "Business Service" button/module still links to the parent table (cmdb_ci_service), which is the old place to store the records. That should link to the new cmdb_ci_service_business child table now right? The same way the Technical Service button/module links to the new cmdb_ci_service_technical child table already. Any way to send feedback on stuff like this too?