starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Device filter with non-racked devices #6544

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:42:09 +01:00 by adam · 11 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:09 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @benwa on GitHub (Jun 7, 2022).

Originally assigned to: @DanSheps on GitHub.

NetBox version

v3.2.4

Python version

3.10

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Go to a location with more than 10 non-racked devices
  2. Click View full list

Expected Behavior

The filter should show non-racked devices

Observed Behavior

A view of devices with the filters for Location: foobar and Rack: None show no devices

Originally created by @benwa on GitHub (Jun 7, 2022). Originally assigned to: @DanSheps on GitHub. ### NetBox version v3.2.4 ### Python version 3.10 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Go to a location with more than 10 non-racked devices 2. Click **View full list** ### Expected Behavior The filter should show non-racked devices ### Observed Behavior A view of devices with the filters for *Location: foobar* and *Rack: None* show no devices
adam added the type: bugstatus: accepted labels 2025-12-29 19:42:09 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:42:10 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:10 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2022):

Thank you for opening a bug report. I was unable to reproduce the reported behavior on NetBox v3.2.4. Please re-confirm the reported behavior on the current stable release and adjust your post above as necessary. Remember to provide detailed steps that someone else can follow using a clean installation of NetBox to reproduce the issue. Remember to include the steps taken to create any initial objects or other data.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2022): Thank you for opening a bug report. I was unable to reproduce the reported behavior on NetBox v3.2.4. Please re-confirm the reported behavior on the current stable release and adjust your post above as necessary. Remember to provide detailed steps that someone else can follow using a clean installation of NetBox to reproduce the issue. Remember to include the steps taken to create any initial objects or other data.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:10 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@benwa commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2022):

I might not have described it correctly, but I did take a recording here:
netbox

@benwa commented on GitHub (Jun 9, 2022): I might not have described it correctly, but I did take a recording here: ![netbox](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1351571/172915019-2255aa65-8a18-4839-b7da-e09777c83c25.gif)
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:11 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2022):

I'm still not able to reproduce this on v3.2.4. Clicking the "View full list" link takes me to the properly filtered devices list, which returns the expected results.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2022): I'm still not able to reproduce this on v3.2.4. Clicking the "View full list" link takes me to the properly filtered devices list, which returns the expected results.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:11 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@benwa commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2022):

I think I see the issue now. This site, location, rack, and devices are "Planned". When I go into one of the devices, it actually has a Rack set, so really, it seems that the devices shouldn't appear in the "Non-Racked Devices" short list. It correctly doesn't appear in the full list.

@benwa commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2022): I think I see the issue now. This site, location, rack, and devices are "Planned". When I go into one of the devices, it actually has a Rack set, so really, it seems that the devices shouldn't appear in the "Non-Racked Devices" short list. It correctly doesn't appear in the full list.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:11 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2022):

Devices will appear in the "non-racked" list so long as they don't have a face/position set. Is that the case for you?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 20, 2022): Devices will appear in the "non-racked" list so long as they don't have a face/position set. Is that the case for you?
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:11 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@benwa commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2022):

I have set half of them to have a face (they're all PDUs) and the other half left blank. They appear in the summary list of a site/location, but not in the full list.

@benwa commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2022): I have set half of them to have a face (they're all PDUs) and the other half left blank. They appear in the summary list of a site/location, but not in the full list.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:11 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2022):

I have set half of them to have a face (they're all PDUs) and the other half left blank. They appear in the summary list of a site/location, but not in the full list.

This is why it is important to have full steps, starting from creation, for us to reproduce issues.

@jeremystretch I think the issue is they are in the "non-racked" list under site but are in a rack, just without a face/position, so when you view the full list, you don't see the devices. Reproduced here: https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/sites/44/ (unless someone deletes it).

Steps to recreate:

  1. Create a site
  2. Create a rack in the site
  3. Create a device in the site and rack but without a position or face
  4. Repeat last step at least 10 more times
  5. View site
  6. Follow link to view "Non-racked" devices
@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2022): > I have set half of them to have a face (they're all PDUs) and the other half left blank. They appear in the summary list of a site/location, but not in the full list. This is why it is important to have full steps, starting from creation, for us to reproduce issues. @jeremystretch I think the issue is they are in the "non-racked" list under site but are in a rack, just without a face/position, so when you view the full list, you don't see the devices. Reproduced here: https://demo.netbox.dev/dcim/sites/44/ (unless someone deletes it). Steps to recreate: 1. Create a site 2. Create a rack in the site 3. Create a device in the site and rack but without a position or face 4. Repeat last step at least 10 more times 5. View site 6. Follow link to view "Non-racked" devices
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 28, 2022):

Ah, yeah I think we've overloaded the term "non-racked" to mean both not assigned to a rack, and not assigned to a position/face, where arguably the former is more correct. It looks like the same template is used for the site, location, and rack views. We should standardize on the behavior for sites & locations, and use a different term for the rack view.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jun 28, 2022): Ah, yeah I think we've overloaded the term "non-racked" to mean both not assigned to a rack, and not assigned to a position/face, where arguably the former is more correct. It looks like the same template is used for the site, location, and rack views. We should standardize on the behavior for sites & locations, and use a different term for the rack view.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2022):

Non-racked for sites & locations

For racks, I can think of:

  • Unpositioned (clunky)
  • Unassigned (Ambiguous)
  • Non-mounted (Could be confusing)

Any other thoughts?

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2022): Non-racked for sites & locations For racks, I can think of: * Unpositioned (clunky) * Unassigned (Ambiguous) * Non-mounted (Could be confusing) Any other thoughts?
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2022):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2022): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. **Do not** attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:42:12 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2022):

Here is the approach I am going to take with this:

  • Modify the query on sites & locations to only return Rack=None devices
  • Leave the naming as-is for now for the following reason:
    • When looking at sites/locations, typically that person looking at the word "non-racked" is going to think: any device not in a rack
    • When looking at a rack itself, typicially someone looking at the word "non-racked" is going to think: any devicie in the rack not with a fixed rack unit position
@DanSheps commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2022): Here is the approach I am going to take with this: * Modify the query on sites & locations to only return Rack=None devices * Leave the naming as-is for now for the following reason: * When looking at sites/locations, typically that person looking at the word "non-racked" is going to think: any device not in a rack * When looking at a rack itself, typicially someone looking at the word "non-racked" is going to think: any devicie in the rack not with a fixed rack unit position
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label status: accepted type: bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#6544
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?