Expand Rack endpoint to include non-racked devices #3924

New Issue

adam · 2025-12-29T18:32:06+01:00

adam commented

2025-12-29 18:32:06 +01:00

Originally created by @soer7022 on GitHub (Jul 30, 2020).

Proposed Functionality

Currently the Rack endpoint displays how many devices it houses, I would like to expand this functionality to be more specific.
I propose an extra field called: nonRackedDevices that indicates how many of these devices that are non-racked

Use Case

This would be useful when interacting with the api for rack capacity reasons, we have a rack that only contains 1U devices but also have some non-racked devices such as PDU's. We would then subtract the non-racked devices from the device count and compare this to the height of the rack, to know how much space was left.

Database Changes

Extra field for non-racked devices

External Dependencies

None

Originally created by @soer7022 on GitHub (Jul 30, 2020).   ### Proposed Functionality Currently the Rack endpoint displays how many devices it houses, I would like to expand this functionality to be more specific. I propose an extra field called: `nonRackedDevices` that indicates how many of these devices that are non-racked  ### Use Case This would be useful when interacting with the api for rack capacity reasons, we have a rack that only contains 1U devices but also have some non-racked devices such as PDU's. We would then subtract the non-racked devices from the device count and compare this to the height of the rack, to know how much space was left.  ### Database Changes Extra field for non-racked devices  ### External Dependencies None

adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 18:32:06 +01:00

adam closed this issue

2025-12-29 18:32:06 +01:00

adam commented

2025-12-29 18:32:06 +01:00

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 30, 2020):

This would be useful when interacting with the api for rack capacity reasons, we have a rack that only contains 1U devices but also have some non-racked devices such as PDU's.

This seems like a very niche use case. Generally speaking, it's not reasonable to assume that all devices within a rack are 1U, so determining utilization isn't as simple as counting the number of installed devices. This also totally ignores the concept of device depth: it's perfectly plausible to have more than 42 half-depth devices in a 42U rack, for instance.

The recommended approach for determining a rack's capacity is to fetch the elevation for a particular face (e.g. GET /api/dcim/racks/<id>/elevation/?face=front). This data allows for easily calculating the amount of used and available space within a rack.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jul 30, 2020): > This would be useful when interacting with the api for rack capacity reasons, we have a rack that only contains 1U devices but also have some non-racked devices such as PDU's. This seems like a very niche use case. Generally speaking, it's not reasonable to assume that all devices within a rack are 1U, so determining utilization isn't as simple as counting the number of installed devices. This also totally ignores the concept of device depth: it's perfectly plausible to have more than 42 half-depth devices in a 42U rack, for instance. The recommended approach for determining a rack's capacity is to fetch the elevation for a particular face (e.g. `GET /api/dcim/racks/<id>/elevation/?face=front`). This data allows for easily calculating the amount of used and available space within a rack.

adam commented

2025-12-29 18:32:06 +01:00

@soer7022 commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2020):

After writing this issue I made some simple logic in my frontend application to do this.

I agree that this is very niche, but it might still be useful to know the amount of non-racked devices, as it shows on the page for the rack.

@soer7022 commented on GitHub (Jul 31, 2020): After writing this issue I made some simple logic in my frontend application to do this. I agree that this is very niche, but it might still be useful to know the amount of non-racked devices, as it shows on the page for the rack.

adam commented

2025-12-29 18:32:06 +01:00

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 1, 2020):

I'm going to decline this as there's been no further discussion. As indicated above, there already exists a mechanism for fetching the desired information.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 1, 2020): I'm going to decline this as there's been no further discussion. As indicated above, there already exists a mechanism for fetching the desired information.

adam referenced this issue

2025-12-29 22:23:07 +01:00

[PR #3924] [CLOSED] Fixes #3509: IPAddressVar for custom scripts #12697

Sign in to join this conversation.

Branches Tags

main

update-changelog-comments-docs

feature-removal-issue-type

20911-dropdown

20239-plugin-menu-classes-mutable-state

21097-graphql-id-lookups

feature

fix_module_substitution

20923-dcim-templates

20044-elevation-stuck-lightmode

feature-ip-prefix-link

v4.5-beta1-release

20068-import-moduletype-attrs

20766-fix-german-translation-code-literals

20378-del-script

7604-filter-modifiers-v3

circuit-swap

12318-case-insensitive-uniqueness

20637-improve-device-q-filter

20660-script-load

19724-graphql

20614-update-ruff

14884-script

02496-max-page

19720-macaddress-interface-generic-relation

19408-circuit-terminations-export-templates

20203-openapi-check

fix-19669-api-image-download

7604-filter-modifiers

19275-fixes-interface-bulk-edit

fix-17794-get_field_value_return_list

11507-show-aggregate-and-rir-on-api

9583-add_column_specific_search_field_to_tables

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#3924