Deleted a detected device by mistake , how can I add them back?

[DCIM_Support]

Hi Community , I recently deleted a bunch of detected devices in DCO. Is there a way to have them back in the accociation TAB?

I deleted some detected RPDU and now I need to have them back so I could monitor my power comsumption in DCO. 

(CID:149291686)

[DCIM_Support]

Hello Sebastien

Are you saying you deleted the items (rackpdu's) from the rack in a DCO room?

If yes, then the external devices (from DCE or ITE for example) should be present again in the unassociated items list which becomes visible when you enter Planning->Device Association mode.

or did you delete the entries from the unassociated items list after they had appeared there? If this is the case, then you'd need to rediscover those devices from the external system (DCE, ITE, or where-ever).

Regards

Greg Sterling

(CID:149291696)

[DCIM_Support]

Hi Greg! Thanks four your quick reply. 

I did deleted a rackpdu from the rack in DCO. The thing is I tought it would be in the unassociated items but it's not! I usualy add a gnome before making a association when adding it in a rack but for some Reason  , I did a drag & drop of the detected rackpdu directly in the rack in DCO. 

It's strange as I did'nt found a way to delete unassociated device? The only way you can is right in the rack view in DCO.  I have DCO 8.0.4 maybe it's a bug?

Otherwise , how can I rediscover them in DCO as they are ok in DCE? 

Thanks a lot for your help!

(CID:149291698)

[DCIM_Support]

The release of DCO you are running is quite old now. I do not remember there being a bug which would appear in this manner.

I performed a test this morning. I dragged a rack PDU discovered by DCE to a rack, then deleted that rack PDU. I'd expect the dce device to re-appear in the unassociated items list in DCO.

If you search for the device name or IP address from the unassociated items list, it does not appear (like the example I pasted below)?

Alternatively, if you are in planning mode and open the discovered devices list by clicking this icon 

Then you can filter the contents of the list to see if your device is present.

In the external systems definition for your DCE server inside DCO there should be a setting which tells DCO how often to refresh device data from DCE. I think hourly is the default.

(CID:149291988)

[DCIM_Support]

Hi Greg! 

The device is effectively in the planning mode when I open the discovered devices list

If I right-click on it , I can't un-associate the device as it is not associated wich is fine. 

I expected the device to be then found in the unassociated items lis but , you guessed it , it is nowhere to be found…

Is there a way to associate the device FROM the discovered list instead of the unassociated list?

BTW I deleted it from DCE and then initiate another scan in DCE , it seems to work then as the RPDU was the in the unassociated list in DCO after some time. My problem is that I must have delete 20+ device this way…. 😉 Is theres another way , I'm interested to know!

(CID:149292018)

[DCIM_Support]

So you see the device in the discovered items list?

In the discovered items list, is the location field for the dce device empty or does it have a location? If the location field is not empty then its still associated to an asset somewhere ... that field will tell you where.

(CID:149292031)

[DCIM_Support]

I see the device in the discovered items list. 

The location field is empty.

The device is NOT in the unassociated item list. (search via name AND ip address to make sure). Do you know another way? 😉 It must be a bug...

(CID:149292037)

[DCIM_Support]

Hi Greg, 

I really appreciate your help and thanks for your effort but at this point I think I will just delete my devices and rescan them in DCE to force them to be unassociated again in DCO... 

(CID:149292614)

[DCIM_Support]

Very good. Sorry we did not find a solution sooner.

Regards

Greg Sterling

(CID:149292618)

[DCIM_Support]

This question is closed for comments. You're welcome to start a new topic if you have further comments on this issue.