Configuration Items - Dependency's

[Jim]

Hi, 

 

Is it possible to add more items into the 'Dependency' drop down when linking asset relationships in the configuration items? I have had a hunt in the simple lists but unable to locate?

 

Thank you

[James Ainsworth]

Hi @Jim

Thanks for your post.

I believe that this is what you might be looking for. 

 

This is a setting that can be found by searching Configuration (Shift+Ctrl+s) and typing items.dependencies

 

I'm not aware if there is anywhere in the user interface to edit this. The content of this setting is in JSON format.  I've provided the layout below to make it easier to read.  

{
"defs" : 
   {
      "set1"              : ["Connected To", "Depends On", "Installed On"],
      "set2"              : ["Connected To", "Depends On", "Installed On"],
      "set3"              : ["Caused By", "Impacted", "Effected By"],
      "default"           : ["Connected To", "Depends On", "Installed On"]
   },
"FromAssetToRequests" : "set3",
"FromRequestsToAsset" : "set3",
"FromAssetToServices" : "set2",
"AssetFromParentToChild" : "set2",
"AssetFromChildToParent"    : "set2"            
}

You should be able to just add your additional item(s) within the [ ] under the appropriate set.  

I hope that helps.

 

[Helen Love]

Jim,

            I am looking for a way to automatically associated assets with suppliers. Import assets via SCCM using Asset_Data_Import_Tool. I believe you can associated them via  Asset Relationship Import tool,  but this appears to read data from sql database. Not sure if it can be altered to except import from SCCM. You mentioned in this post app.cm.explorer.items.dependencies not sure if this is away to assign associations automatically. Thanks in advance.

[Jim]

Hi @James Ainsworth

Thank you for getting back to me

Luckily I managed to find this myself yesterday in just enough time to make myself look good  is their any guidance/documentation on the 'sets' at all?

[James Ainsworth]

I  couldn't see any documentation on the sets.  I would suggest that the listed relationships are set in stone, but you can add your own sets and associate them with the available relationships.  At the moment, set 2 is used on 3 of the relationships.  I'm assuming that you could add sets 4 and 5 and then apply these different sets to the relationships as required.