Apply device templates to devices after changes made to the template

[PieterL75]

I ran into the fact, that I forgot to add some interfaces/psu to my device templates.
Currently, when the device template is updated, the devices using that template are not updated.

Is it a feasible feature request to create such a functionality ?
I do understand that there are quite some limitations and imperfections on this.

• what if the you delete an interface from a template
• what if the interface was already manually added to the device and the template is updated afterwards ?

any ideas ?

Pieter

[candlerb]

I wrote some code a while ago to identify and add missing components:

• a report to highlight missing components
• a script to add missing components to all devices

The latter script runs from the CLI. I have not converted it into "Custom Script" that runs inside Netbox itself, but that would be straightforward for anyone who wants to pick it up (and also allow you to select specific devices to run against).

It won't remove any existing components, nor will it change existing components with the same name.

[Pifan91]

Netbox version?

v4.1.11

[candlerb]

OK, try the first patch I gave, and if it works I'll submit it as a pull request. I don't use module bays in any active installations I have access to.

[Pifan91]

To test this, you could try modifying the script like this:

An exception occurred: TypeError: 'ModuleBay' object is not callable

[candlerb]

Maybe you didn't apply the patch correctly. The line starting "-" needs to be removed, and replaced with the line starting with "+" (but without the +)

That is:

                items = [
                    (x.instantiate(device=device, level=0) if isinstance(x, ModuleBay) else x.instantiate(device=device))
                    for x in templates
                    if x.name not in names
                ]

[Pifan91]

Yes, but it didn't help

IntegrityError: null value in column "level" of relation "dcim_modulebay" violates not-null constraint DETAIL:

Sorry, I don't know how to program.
just wanted to solve the problem with modulebay

[jeremystretch]

If you need to add additional interfaces to existing devices of a certain type, simply filter the devices list by type, select all, then click Add components > interfaces. This will accomplish exactly what you want while avoiding any nasty surprises.

[ravinald]

I'm not sure if those in this discussion are approaching it as I am, but I look at templates as the foundation by which a device is configured. While your method is functionally the same, it bypasses the function of a template as I use them. It would be great if the initial feature could exist, and to mitigate reconciliation I would be happy if was additive such that only Components that are on the template and not on the device will be added. Nothing that already exists will be altered or deleted.

Edit: As I sit here musing on being in a similar situation I find my options are:

1. Create a new, duplicate device using the Device Template and manually adding back attributes (serial, cf, etc)
2. Add the dozen or so interface I didn't have part of the template at initial configuration with your method

I can't shake the feeling that while 2 works it isn't what I feel is the more correct method. I thing it is, in part, that I would be doing the same task twice -- once to update the template and the second time to update all the existing devices.

[candlerb]

only Components that are on the template and not on the device will be added. Nothing that already exists will be altered or deleted

That's exactly what the script I linked to does.

I thing it is, in part, that I would be doing the same task twice -- once to update the template and the second time to update all the existing devices

Not really. You do the job once on the device type ("template" as you call it), where you define things like all the interface types. Then you just do an update operation on the devices, so that they pick up all these interfaces you've defined (you don't need to defined them again). Doing it on the device type also means that all future instances of the device type will be correct.

[ravinald]

@candlerb I was replying to @jeremystretch's comment. Your script indeed does solve the feature/limitation, and thank you for it.