MSSQL Discovery - Optional Applicative Credentials

[Josh P1]

Hey all,

We are going through trying to evaluate the discovery requirements and how to meet those requirements.  However, I am having a bit trouble understanding some of the documentation when it comes the credentials sections.  In some cases the docs mention that the certain credentials are optional, but I do not understand under what circumstances the credentials are optional or the effects of omitting the optional credentials.  For example, under MSSQL server discovery there are entries for Applicative Credentials and the second indicates the credentials are optional, but I am failing to understand what is optional about the credentials.  If we are choose to not set the credentials, what are we omitting (if anything) from the discovery process?

Thanks,

Josh

[DaveHertel]

Josh -- for your SQL discovery you'll need both: A) Windows server (admin) credentials on the box and B) SQL credentials that allows Disco probes to interrogate at the SQL level (for catalog/instance info that requires a SQL account... a windows admin isn't good enough to get SQL -specific content)

Hope this helps?

[pratiksha5]

Hi Dave, what role the SQL user should have to get this information? 

[DaveHertel]

Hi - the details on SQL discovery and Applicative credentials are here in the docs:

SQL discovery

Applicative Credentials 

Unfortunately, it doesn't state the 'role' of the SQL user for applicative creds but it does state what SQL object the SQL user needs access to.  So ensure whatever SQL account you use has this permission (regardless if its is granted via a role or otherwise) 

HHope this helps some??

[Josh P1]

Thanks Dave,

While this helps specify the credential requirements for the MSSQL example given - I am still unclear under what circumstance the Application Credendtials are optional.  Are they optional if the primary requirements are unachievable for some reason?  Or is there additional discoverable information that can be gathered using the optional requirements?

Thanks,

Josh