Discovery Discovery Scoping DDM 8.0 Advanced

Why an Efficient Approach is Needed - HR exampleWarning: Do Not actually read this slide unless you are up for some Espresso!CIs/host = Hosts + Host Resources + Network + NW resources + Database + DB Resources + Apps + Appresources + connections/dependenciesC/H = H + HR + NW + NWR + DB + DBR + A + AR + CAssumptions and ranges:Where H = 1, HR = cpu(1-64), memory(1), disk(1-10, avg 5 for unix, 3 for Windows), Services (50-75), processes(40-100), software (40-100 for Windows, 150-600 for unix)NW = 1/# servers per network (subnet), NWR = Interface/indexes(2-6)DB = 1/# servers not a DB server X DBR, DBR = (50-500)A = 1/# servers/app X AR, AR = (50-500) + 10,000 from external sourceC = 10-100Non-resourced (aka a “shallow” or “weak” host ~ 15-20 CIs,Resourced host (aka “strong” or “complete” host) ~ 1,200-11,000 CIsDifference ratio: 20 : 600 = 1:30Example:5,000 hosts, 1,000 are resourced = 20% of hosts go “deep”, 80% are shared or shallow hosts (not an appserver or DB)Comprehensive discovery = 5000 x 600 = 3,000,000 CIs per 5,000 hostsEfficient discovery = 1000 x 600 + 4000 x 20 = 600,000 + 80,000 = 680,000 CIs per 5,000 hosts680K / 3,000K = ~226% difference in efficiency – CMDB affects limits of TQL, GUI, etc. capacity and performanceScale 5,000 to 50,000 hosts in an enterprise environment = factor of 10, a single order of magnitude3million CIs become 30 million CIs, 680K CIs become 6.8 million CIs, 441% the size of an efficient discoveryThis significantly impacts the pace of the mapping schedule based on the supported (published) capacity of theUCMDB systems (not just the CMDB)Conclusion: Inefficient discovery not only slows performance of the CMDB, it ultimately slows the maximum paceof the mapping effort and impacts delivery of value.29HP CONFIDENTIAL - ENABLEMENT ONLY, NOT FOR CUSTOMER USE.