Hi all,

I have encountered a weird issue where devices targeted by a patch schedule don't match the device smart label that is assigned to the patch schedule. Any suggestions on how to resolve this would be much appreciated. 

To clarify I am attempting to set up a patch schedule that will detect / deploy Windows and application patches to devices that are new to the K1000. I have set up a custom inventory rule that checks the time stamp of a "bread crumb" file that our K2000 systems deployment system leaves - FileInfoReturn(%AllUsersProfile%\Dell\Kace\K2000_deployment_info.conf, creation_time, DATE). I then set up a smart label using the newly created custom inventory rule and set it to find any devices created within the last 48 hours. I used the test function on the smart label and it returned the correct result - two machines (only two computers had been imaged within the last 48 hours). Happy that the smart label was working correctly I configured a patch schedule and assigned the (device) smart label to it. I ran the patch schedule but noticed that for some reason instead of the expected two devices, eight devices had been targeted (two were the correct devices that I previously identified from the smart label). No other device labels or individual devices have been assigned to the patch schedule

I had a look into the six devices that shouldn't be assigned to this patch schedule but can't figure out why they are being included. None of the six devices even have the custom inventory applied as they have all been offline since I created the custom inventory rule (maybe that has something to do with it?).  

Any suggestion would be much appreciated :)

Thank you,
Joe 


3 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments

Comments

  • Please post the SQL query for the smart label.
    • Thank you

      SELECT MACHINE.NAME AS SYSTEM_NAME, SYSTEM_DESCRIPTION, MACHINE.IP, MACHINE.MAC, MACHINE.ID as TOPIC_ID FROM MACHINE WHERE ((( exists (select 1 from MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY where MACHINE.ID = MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY.ID and MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY.SOFTWARE_ID = 23846 and (TIMESTAMP(MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY.DATE_FIELD_VALUE) <= NOW() AND TIMESTAMP(MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY.DATE_FIELD_VALUE) > DATE_SUB(NOW(),INTERVAL 48 HOUR)))) ) AND (OS_NAME not like '%server%'))
  • I'm curious what the data in the MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY table shows for SOFTWARE_ID = 23846. Do you have a tool like MySQL Workbench setup? If not then you can create a new SQL report that uses this query:
    SELECT * FROM MACHINE_CUSTOM_INVENTORY
    WHERE SOFTWARE_ID = 23846

    The query for the smart label looks alright so I'm wondering what the data looks like.
  • Sorry if the below looks a bit mangled, here's a few lines out of the SQL report you mentioned:

    # Id Software Id Str Field Value Num Field Value Modified Date Field Value Field Value Type
    1 4598 23846 02/09/2016 10:30:14 04/11/2014 03:09:00 2
    2 4805 23846 02/09/2016 10:35:51 31/08/2015 22:26:13 2

    There are 962 entries in that SQL report which sounds about right in regards to how many devices would have the K2000 breadcrumb.
    • I can't be sure because of the formatting, but it looks like the breadcrumb date is in the STR_FIELD_VALUE column. Can you confirm?
      • The breadcrumb date shows up under the "Date Field Value".

        I may have figured out what’s going on. I’ve noticed that all the devices that are incorrect listed in the patch schedule have been offline since around the time I created that custom inventory rule. I hypothesis that the K1000 has flagged these machines to report on the next check in whether the custom inventory field I created exists for them. However the machines got shut off before they could report back to the K1000. For whatever reason Kace then attaches these “limbo” devices to the patch job (but not to the test feature of the device smart label?).

        To confirm this I managed to physically find one of the mystery devices that was showing up in the patch schedule and powered it on. Lo and behold it disappeared out of the patch schedule.

        Thanks for your help Chuck
Please log in to comment

There are no answers at this time

Answers

Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity
Nine Simple (but Critical) Tips for Effective Patch Management
This paper reviews nine simple tips that can make patch management simpler, more effective and less expensive.

Share