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

Power feeds not registering chained devices #7373

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:22:34 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:22:34 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @dutchman80 on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022).

NetBox version

v3.4

Python version

3.9

Steps to Reproduce

Create Power Feed "pf1"
Create UPS "ups1" and connect Power Port to Power Feed "pf1"
Create PDU "pdu1" and connect Power Port to "ups1" Power Outlet
Create Switch "switch1" and connect Power Port to "pdu1" Power Outlet

Power chain is now: switch1 > pdu1 > ups1 > pf1

When connected in this manner, no load is being registered on the power feed "pf1"

If I remove the UPS from the chain, connecting "pdu1" directly to "pf1", then load from "switch1" starts registering on "pf1"

This was called out in the past in issue #7565...maybe a regression?

Expected Behavior

A power feed should register the load from all devices in the power chain

Observed Behavior

Power feeds only seem to be registering loads from devices connected one layer deep in the power chain

Originally created by @dutchman80 on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022). ### NetBox version v3.4 ### Python version 3.9 ### Steps to Reproduce Create Power Feed "pf1" Create UPS "ups1" and connect Power Port to Power Feed "pf1" Create PDU "pdu1" and connect Power Port to "ups1" Power Outlet Create Switch "switch1" and connect Power Port to "pdu1" Power Outlet Power chain is now: switch1 > pdu1 > ups1 > pf1 When connected in this manner, no load is being registered on the power feed "pf1" If I remove the UPS from the chain, connecting "pdu1" directly to "pf1", then load from "switch1" starts registering on "pf1" This was called out in the past in issue #7565...maybe a regression? ### Expected Behavior A power feed should register the load from all devices in the power chain ### Observed Behavior Power feeds only seem to be registering loads from devices connected one layer deep in the power chain
adam added the type: bugstatus: revisions needed labels 2025-12-29 20:22:34 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:22:34 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:22:34 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022):

When connected in this manner, no load is being registered on the power feed "pf1"

You've not specified a power draw for any of the ports.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022): > When connected in this manner, no load is being registered on the power feed "pf1" You've not specified a power draw for any of the ports.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:22:35 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dutchman80 commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022):

The switch device connected to the PDU has a registered power draw. If I connect the PDU to the power feed directly, I see load on the power feed. It's just when the PDU is connected to the UPS (which is connected to the power feed) that I don't see load on the power feed.

@dutchman80 commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022): The switch device connected to the PDU has a registered power draw. If I connect the PDU to the power feed directly, I see load on the power feed. It's just when the PDU is connected to the UPS (which is connected to the power feed) that I don't see load on the power feed.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:22:35 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022):

Please update your issue above to provide steps that someone else can follow to replicate the reported problem. No one else has access to your installation to verify how it is configured.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2022): Please update your issue above to provide steps that someone else can follow to replicate the reported problem. No one else has access to your installation to verify how it is configured.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:22:35 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 27, 2022):

Closing this out as sufficient detail to reproduce the reported behavior has not been provided.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 27, 2022): Closing this out as sufficient detail to reproduce the reported behavior has not been provided.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:22:36 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dutchman80 commented on GitHub (Jan 8, 2023):

Hi, I didn't see your last reply; sorry for the delay in commenting.

I'm not sure what other steps I can provide to reproduce the issue, other than the steps I provided in the initial issue. What further detail can I give?

Basically, if you have more than one pass-through device (i.e. PDU & UPS) between the power feed and the device consuming the power, then the power feed registers 0 utilization.

@dutchman80 commented on GitHub (Jan 8, 2023): Hi, I didn't see your last reply; sorry for the delay in commenting. I'm not sure what other steps I can provide to reproduce the issue, other than the steps I provided in the initial issue. What further detail can I give? Basically, if you have more than one pass-through device (i.e. PDU & UPS) between the power feed and the device consuming the power, then the power feed registers 0 utilization.
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: revisions needed 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#7373
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?