CMDB CI Naming Convention (do you include version ID?)

[philmurray]

We are exploring whether a CI should include the version as part of the name rather than keep it as a separate attribute.   Here's an example of why we are thinking about this:

We have two supported versions of Tomcat in our estate.   One is Tomcat V4.1.27, the other is Tomcat V5.5.9.   In the CMDB there are a few ways to enter this data:

1.We could have a single Tomcat CI with two related records, one for each version.

2.We could have two Tomcat CIs each with an attribute for the different version.

3.We could have two CIs, one called Tomcat v4.1.28 and one called Tomcat v5.5.9.

The benefit of option 3 is that when we raise an incident or change it is explicit which version is involved.   That provides clarity for reporting and analysis.   We can get the same clarity if we use option 2 but we need to amend the inputs for incident and change so that people can see the attributes in order to choose the correct CI.

How do other ServiceNow users approach this conundrum?

[umesh2]

Option 3.

For the ease of use, clarity, consistency and accuracy of the reporting, we had adopted option 3 in my last company.

[Sanjeev Kumar1]

Hi Philip,

we are using Version field for this.

When user search for CI We also showing him Version.

Thanks,

[philmurray]

Thanks Sanjeev, that sounds like you use option 2 - multiple CIs each with their own version?

[Community Alums]

I would be careful with naming conventions for CIs. What happens if something about that CI changes. For example, in this case, you would need to make sure the name updates if you upgrade the version of the software. Because of this, I would recommend displaying the version field.

Ben