I have also been thinking about this, and am using the following arrangement to simulate "dependency" (really just documenting "associatedness").
Under /Systems, I have 2 subgroups: "Services" and "Infrastructure". Under "Services", I have common names for a service in the ITIL sense (some generic term like "Web Portal" or "Data Warehouse"). Under "Infastructure", I have subgroups like "OS/Linux" and "DBMS/Mysql" and "Application/Exchange". Under "Groups", I have 2 categories, "Lifecycle" and "Organization". "Lifecycle" has subgroups for DEV or PROD, while "Organization" refers to corporate (human) structure. By controlling a Device's membership to various of these groups, I can set up alerts and other functions depending on that membership. This does not give the kind of dependency-related info that is mentioned (app->DB->SAN) , but it does allow me to have (app,db,SAN) -related devices be a member of a given application's group, and to have associated functions dependent on that group. -------------------- m2f -------------------- Read this topic online here: http://forums.zenoss.com/viewtopic.php?p=36192#36192 -------------------- m2f -------------------- _______________________________________________ zenoss-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zenoss.org/mailman/listinfo/zenoss-users
