- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-08-2020 02:02 PM
Hello, I am creating an process for my organization to better manage discovery errors. During my discovery I have been reviewing the error reports from the CI Schedule Manager and the Discovery Dashboard. Discovery Dashboard uses the discovery active errors table and the CI Schedule Manager uses the automation error messages table. They are both useful, however I don't understand why there are two tables. Can someone explain the difference between the two and use cases where one is more useful than the other?
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Labels:
-
Discovery
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-08-2020 02:43 PM
Hi -- I never use the disco dashboard. While its pretty and simple, it gets in the way of efficient troubleshooting IMHO. For the reason you point out (2 tables... similar errors) its doesn't help beyond providing big bold numbers... which are misleading in my opinion. Further, drilling into the error tiles and details behind the dashboard leads teh user down the wrong path (again, IMHO).. because it doesnt dive into the depths of the logs you REALLY need to troubleshoot. I always recommend avoiding it - its visual 'appeal' is much less appealing when you get frustrated trying to troubleshoot whats behind the numbers. Further, I find the summary numbers misleading and conflicting. What is called an "Error" on the dashboard isn't always an "error" in the log or vice versa. That is poor design by degrading and confusing the troubleshooting efforts conflicting terminology.
For disco admins that are focused on the elimination of errors (not just viewing a pretty summary), I leverage the REAL Disco tables where the 'action' is. They are more effective but not always clean/simple in interpret. ECC_QUEUE, Discovery Device history & Discovery Log are my go-to troubleshooting sources. While the *automation tables used by the dashboard are a waste of time for me. A few reports wrapped around useful disco tables are much more efficient for digging into errors and ultimately reducing them. My 2 cents
Hope this helps?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-17-2021 08:00 AM
Hi -- No, I personally don't bother with that/those tables. The logs I use are discovery log, ecc queue, etc. where the "real" errors are recorded and are more helpful (IMHO) to eliminating the root cause of errors. The dashboard and its related detail does not use consistent categorization of "errors" vs. "warnings", etc. compared to the real disco logs... which is just frustrating when you have to spend time cross-correlating what the dashboard reported vs. the actual disco logs.
While there is surely some value in those automation msg tables, they are extra overhead & time needlessly spent (more unnecessary overhead in correlating the facts) for me. I prefer to go to the source of the 'problems' via the disco logs & ecc queue and use them to guide my next steps... My 2.5 cents
Hope this helps some?
