How to model my Service Model
Elizabeth 1978
I have this question for today:
I have a sw made up of 4 pieces:
2 can be installed in Stand Alone;
2 can be installed either in Cluster or in Stand Alone.
I created 4 classes based on Windows Application Component.
I have also one class I use as Seed Class based on Windows Computer Role.
I have developed 3 discoveries (working perfectly):
1 for the seed class. This discovery has Windows Server as target class.
2 registry-based for the 2 Stand Alone pieces with the Seed Class as target.
1 script-based for the 2 Clustered / Stand Alone pieces with the Seed Class
as target.
So far so good ‘cause now I have 1 instance found for each class.
I have created a group class for grouping all computers hosting my classes.
The class is based on Instance Group.
The population for this class uses InstanceGroupContainsEntities as
relationship.
The population has 4 memberships (one for each of my pieces of sw) all with
Server Computer as Monitoring Class that must contain the instances of my
classes.
So far so good ‘cause now when I expand my Group Class I can see image01.jpg.
(http://cid-55c7e1179864dd7f.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/.Public/Image01.JPG)
Now there is the problem:
BPMCLUS.SCOMDOMAIN.NET represents the Virtual Windows Computer hosting the
first of my clustered resources
CUS01PL01.SCOMDOMAIN.NET represents the Virtual Windows Computer hosting the
second of my clustered resources
CUS02CLU01 is the first physical node of my cluster
CUS02CLU02 is the second physical node of my cluster
What I want to do?
As you can see the four Windows Computers are at the same level.
But I want to see BPMCLUS.SCOMDOMAIN.NET and CUS01PL01.SCOMDOMAIN.NET under
the physical node (either CUS02CLU01 or CUS02CLU02) where currently they are
hosted.
What do you suggest in order to achieve this goal?
...maybe I am wrong but I am persuaded that the service model must be
exactly represented with the Diagram View. Therefore in my persuasion in the
Diagram View I should see the two cluster physical nodes as father of all the
clustered resources instead than at the same level.
Is my persuasion rigth or wrong?
Thank you!
Elizabeth