Skip to main content

I’m trying to create an “Item Relation”-channel to help our engineers create relationship between existing items in the Assyst CMDB. 

Doing so I’ve created a web import channel that accepts CSV files, but during test runs I’m having some issues during imports when creating new item relationships. I’ve been unable to set the correct “side” of the relationship to the Main Item as attempted to specify in the “Item Relation”-datamapper. 

 

I’m working with a single Item Relation datamapper.

After selecting the main and related item using variable assyst search I’ve tried using “Relation Type”, and lookup by ID, followed by an Related Detail” selecting the wanted detailId for the main item.

However doing it this way I’ve been unable to correctly select which mainDetailId is set to the “Main item” during an import.

The item selected as “Main item“ in the datamapper seems to always get the lowest ID detailID when created during import, regardless of what is selected in “Related Detail”.  

Is there something wrong with this approach to creating item relations, how is this supposed to be done? Has anyone else have experienced a similar issue?

The approach you are taking is correct. If you looks the CMDB gateway ETM configuration in the wiki you'll see that mapper "09. Software Relationship Mapper" does just this. As you've discovered you need to specify the main & related items, the relation type and the main & related detail fields. The CMDB gateway mapper gets the main & related detail objects via the relation type object (which it obtains in mapper 05)

The approach you are taking is correct. If you looks the CMDB gateway ETM configuration in the wiki you'll see that mapper "09. Software Relationship Mapper" does just this. As you've discovered you need to specify the main & related items, the relation type and the main & related detail fields. The CMDB gateway mapper gets the main & related detail objects via the relation type object (which it obtains in mapper 05)

Thank you very much!

I was not aware of this wiki article. 

Examining the article and the provided datamapper put me on the right track, and I’ve realized where I went wrong.

 

The error I was experiencing was due to a language barrier and a False Friend, causing a complete misunderstanding as to the use of “main detail”- and “related detail”-objects. This further caused me to believe “related detail” was the single object to be used when setting the relation detail during datamapping.


Thus, in my datamappers I did not know you had to specify both a “main detail” object and a “related detail” object during creation. Having this false  belief I was solely using a “related detail” object and a “Relation Type” object it in my datamappers, believing the “second part” of the relationship type pair was meant to always auto-resolve.

 

Using all three objects Relation Type, Main detail, and Related detail i have been able to create item relations as expected.

 

Once again, thank you very much 😄

 

Kind regards,

-Richard

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings