Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Advice on how to add componenets to hardware #190

Closed
greavette opened this issue Jul 4, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

Advice on how to add componenets to hardware #190

greavette opened this issue Jul 4, 2016 · 2 comments
Labels
status: duplicate This issue has already been raised

Comments

@greavette
Copy link

Hello All,

Great system here..thanks very much for making it available for all to use!

I'd like to be able to add to my physical servers such components as:
Disk Information (Manufacture) Size, speed, Drive bay installed, Model #, Date installed, Warranty end date)
Ram Information (Manufacturer, Speed, DIMM slot, Model #, Date installed).

And I'd like to be able to add in as a hardware my Supermicro Fat Twin Servers (https://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/FatTwin.cfm). These aren't blade servers, but they have individual nodes (servers) installed so being able to identify the Fat Twin box and assign a node to each box (with the details of the CPU, Ram, Disks, Nics that come with each node).

Could someone point me in the right direction here on how I can configure netbox so I can get this level of detail.

Thank you in advance for any advice you can provide.

@peelman
Copy link
Contributor

peelman commented Jul 5, 2016

FatTwins are, for all intents and purposes, blade servers. #91 and #51 discuss that request in more detail.

Right now there isn't really a way to document things like the CPU speed, RAM, Disks, etc. NICs certainly (though not their MAC addresses).

I think expanding the Component details has probably been discussed somewhat in #157

Fleshing out the DCIM component into a full blown asset-management system is on my agenda, but right now that is probably a 2.0 goal and not something that will happen in the near-term.

@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: duplicate This issue has already been raised and removed new feature labels Jul 6, 2016
@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

Going to close this as a duplicate since it's covered by the individual issues @peelman linked above.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 23, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
status: duplicate This issue has already been raised
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants