Playing around with Computer Groups in the REST API and I was somewhat dismayed to find out that, when creating a(n Automatic) Computer Group, you need to specify both the Property/Comparison/Value (e.g. Computer Name equals “My PC”) AND the resulting Relevance, AND that the Relevance is exploding the Property into its Relevance.
Am I correct in assuming, then, that if I were to change the Relevance of the Property (say, after finding a more efficient way to do it), that the Computer Groups using that Property would not update to match, requiring each Computer Group using that property to be found and refreshed?
Yes, and it is by design that changing the relevance of a property does not impact computer groups that use that property in their definition. This is similar to how an action takes a snapshot of a Fixlet’s relevance and actionscript at deployment time. This is to avoid circumstances where changes to one object create unexpected or unintended changes to another object.
The Console does show you, in the description tab of a computer group, when the definition references an older version of a property. Here’s an example:
That said, I do think we can and should make it easier to find and better manage such cases. Additionally, I can certainly see the value in being able to reference/link an object to another (including properties within computer groups). There’s of course a fair bit of complexity around that we’d have to manage such as highlighting dependencies and permissions given potential differences in scope.
I’ve dreamed of this for a long, long time… to find reports, groups, etc., that use a property in order to know if it can be removed from production or not.
I did notice that when editing a group there’s an Update button whether a change is made or not. Will simply editing and clicking Update re-write the Group logic to use the current Property definition rather than the “old version”?
