Is there a way to exclude a particular server/workstation from a smart label (if it would normally fall into the criteria putting it there) without rebuilding the smart label and excluding it there by name, for example?

Answer Summary:
you can always create a "Excluded systems" label and then also use "label does not equal" that name when you need to exclude that machine or group of machines.
Cancel
0 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments

Comments

Please log in to comment

Answers

3

you can always create a "Excluded systems" label and then also use "label does not equal" that name when you need to exclude that machine or group of machines.

Answered 03/06/2013 by: SMal.tmcc
Red Belt

  • that sounds like the best solution--but it will require me to rebuild the label one more time, I guess I can suck it up! thanks for the idea
    • the advantage is you will always have that exclude for future uses.
      • Be careful, though. Labels-based-on-other-labels are not foolproof. I have not found out how to ensure that the K1000 checks label conditions in a specific order (i.e. its non-deterministic). Let me give a concrete example: Label "C" requires a machine to be both a member of label "B" and label "A". If the K1000 tries to apply label "C" _before_ applying both label "A" and "B", machines are going to be missed. We've found that stacking labels 2 deep (i.e. Label "C" requires a machine to also have label "A") works most of the time. But further layers of recursion do not work consistently - sometimes label "C" will be the last label checked; other times it may be the first label that the KBOX checks. Use care, and good luck!
  • thanks for the tip. I"m not foreseeing needing more than, say, an "excluded" label, and a smart label with one criteria being "not excluded" Good food for thought though, thanks all
Please log in to comment
Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity