Track VM hypervisor host #2089

Closed
opened 2025-12-29 17:22:10 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
Owner

Originally created by @ebusto on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018).

Environment

  • Python version: 3.5.4
  • NetBox version: 2.4.7

Proposed Functionality

It would be useful to track which physical device a VM resides on.

Use Case

In the case where a VM is not automatically migrated from one VM cluster member to another (such as with VMware vSphere's vMotion functionality), it would be quite useful to know which VMs would be impacted by a device failing or requiring maintenance.

Database Changes

One additional virtual machine field, which would be optional, along with a validation to ensure the device is a member of the cluster hosting the VM.

External Dependencies

None.

Originally created by @ebusto on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018). ### Environment * Python version: 3.5.4 * NetBox version: 2.4.7 ### Proposed Functionality It would be useful to track which physical device a VM resides on. ### Use Case In the case where a VM is not automatically migrated from one VM cluster member to another (such as with VMware vSphere's vMotion functionality), it would be quite useful to know which VMs would be impacted by a device failing or requiring maintenance. ### Database Changes One additional virtual machine field, which would be optional, along with a validation to ensure the device is a member of the cluster hosting the VM. ### External Dependencies None.
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 17:22:10 +01:00
Author
Owner

@ebusto commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018):

This also provides a mechanism to capture the relationship between bare-metal servers and their parent devices.

@ebusto commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018): This also provides a mechanism to capture the relationship between [bare-metal servers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bare-metal_server) and their parent devices.
Author
Owner

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018):

This was discussed at length in #142 during the original implementation. The current model was largely agreed upon and likely won't be substantially changed in the near future.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018): This was discussed at length in #142 during the original implementation. The current model was largely agreed upon and likely won't be substantially changed in the near future.
Author
Owner

@ebusto commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018):

That's unfortunate, considering how trivial a change this is.

@ebusto commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2018): That's unfortunate, considering how trivial a change this is.
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#2089