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

Allow processing webhooks when global config context has been updated #7799

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:28:20 +01:00 by adam · 5 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:28:20 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @abhi1693 on GitHub (Mar 26, 2023).

NetBox version

v3.4.6

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

When a user makes a change to the global config context, the webhooks should be triggered automatically for the affected devices.

Use case

We manage our syslog configuration by site/tenant via the global config context. In some cases, it needs a little tweak now and then when a new platform is added or to comply with our organization policy. It becomes harder to track down all the devices that are affected by the config context and do a fake update just to trigger the webhooks.

The auto-trigger of the webhooks will geatly reduce the time needed to re-run the hooks manually, will avoid human errors wherein a device could be missed.

I have thought of applying the content types of config context as well on the webhook and then use the DB ID as the condition but that seems like a hack and feels more error prone if a user deletes the context and re-creates it (for whatever reason), the hook will never be triggered.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @abhi1693 on GitHub (Mar 26, 2023). ### NetBox version v3.4.6 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality When a user makes a change to the global config context, the webhooks should be triggered automatically for the affected devices. ### Use case We manage our syslog configuration by site/tenant via the global config context. In some cases, it needs a little tweak now and then when a new platform is added or to comply with our organization policy. It becomes harder to track down all the devices that are affected by the config context and do a fake update just to trigger the webhooks. The auto-trigger of the webhooks will geatly reduce the time needed to re-run the hooks manually, will avoid human errors wherein a device could be missed. I have thought of applying the content types of config context as well on the webhook and then use the DB ID as the condition but that seems like a hack and feels more error prone if a user deletes the context and re-creates it (for whatever reason), the hook will never be triggered. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: featurestatus: under review labels 2025-12-29 20:28:20 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:28:20 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:28:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Mar 26, 2023):

I don't see any way to feasibly implement this. Imagine the following netbox instance:

  • 10k devices
  • 1k virtual machines
  • 500 modules

Someone creates, edits or deletes a config context with no filters (will apply to all devices, vms and modules). The result would be 11500 webhooks being queued. The webhooks themselves are sent in a background task, but all 11500 objects must be serialized and queued in the same request as the save. Conservatively this would take minutes to complete.

Do you have a proposed implementation of your FR?

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Mar 26, 2023): I don't see any way to feasibly implement this. Imagine the following netbox instance: * 10k devices * 1k virtual machines * 500 modules Someone creates, edits or deletes a config context with no filters (will apply to all devices, vms and modules). The result would be 11500 webhooks being queued. The webhooks themselves are sent in a background task, but all 11500 objects must be serialized and queued in the same request as the save. Conservatively this would take minutes to complete. Do you have a proposed implementation of your FR?
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:28:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2023):

I guess this should be blocked until https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/11202 is implemented. With background processing, your concern should be addressed

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2023): I guess this should be blocked until https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/11202 is implemented. With background processing, your concern should be addressed
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:28:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2023):

I guess this should be blocked until #11202 is implemented. With background processing, your concern should be addressed

As I said, webhooks are already processed in the background, but you still need to serialize the objects up front. So we still need a proposed implementation here.

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Mar 27, 2023): > I guess this should be blocked until #11202 is implemented. With background processing, your concern should be addressed As I said, webhooks are already processed in the background, but you still need to serialize the objects up front. So we still need a proposed implementation here.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:28:21 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 2023):

I'll try to think of something then. I thought serialisation would also be off loaded to the worker.

@abhi1693 commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 2023): I'll try to think of something then. I thought serialisation would also be off loaded to the worker.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:28:22 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 4, 2023):

I have to agree that unfortunately this doesn't seem feasible without some clever solution yet to be identified. I'm going to close this out for now, but if you do come up with an approach that can scale please feel free to re-open.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 4, 2023): I have to agree that unfortunately this doesn't seem feasible without some clever solution yet to be identified. I'm going to close this out for now, but if you do come up with an approach that can scale please feel free to re-open.
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: under review type: feature
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#7799
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?