Idea Details

Allow the New Scorecards to be over 10,000 items

Last activity 05-29-2019 03:31 PM
Marko Popovich's profile image
05-16-2017 11:45 AM

We are a huge company, Verizon, and we have over 10K routers, 10K switches, 10K interfaces, etc... The new Scorecards were a long time coming and are of a HUGE value to us, however we cannot use them due to the limitation of the counts. PLEASE change this so that we can adjust the amount of items we which to view or default it to unlimited. PS: I was so excited to show this to our NOC team only to realize we cannot use them due to this limitation, which was a huge disappointment. Now I need to figure out how best to break it into smaller pieces, making the dashboards more convoluted.

 


Comments

10-09-2017 11:35 AM

Here is another Card View issue I found that I posted under Ideas: 

1. IM Group Scorecard Table is Device centric

2. IM Group Scorecard Table using Health Indicator sort

10-09-2017 11:20 AM

Hello Jason, thanks for your reply. My name is Marko Popovich and I work for Verizon. Verizon is a huge network so, at times, I am finding that we are pushing CAPM to its limits. I found the variable to change the CardView maximum limit in "Performance Center Global Attributes". I changed it to 20K and got what I needed. We have over 10K Power Supplies that I want us to monitor. It loads pretty quick so no issues there.

 

I have a case opened on nearly every scorecard type. Some you already know about, like querying and sorting on the Health Indicator, but others also have issues. Example, in this trouble ticket case, 00793727, I found that when the set of devices in the View are too big then it does not grab the entire set of devices. It appears it grabs a subset and then sorts that, causing us to miss a large amount of information.

 

To summarize what I am trying diligently to do is to create a one-view dashboard that summarizes all performance data on one screen, with lots of colors (not standard tables or graphs) that breach thresholds. This would be for the NOC to monitor at all times and it would be easy for them to drill down. This was my hope for the Health Indicator and the CardView, but neither really can do this.

 

I hope this helps. Now that I moved the CardView to 20K I got my immediate need fixed. But still, the other scorecards are not scaled for large networks, making them unusable for us, and a "NOC AppView" of sorts, would be a huge benefit to CAPM.

08-10-2017 01:27 PM

Hi! - (Didn't catch your name?) 

 

Thanks for the feedback and we are in fact looking into expanding the data available in our Scorecards. The example you showed however is our "Card" view and functions a bit differently. Our Scorecards have a 500 row limit and as you noted, our Card views have a 10,000 item limit. We weren't looking into increasing that 10,000 number but I would like to ask a couple of questions to better understand your use case.

 

1. How many do you think we should show? Realistically, what would you think is reasonable?

 

2. What is your primary use case and "who" does "what" with the data?

 

3. How long does that view take to load and what historical time-frames do you primarily use? (last hour, last 4 hours, etc.)

 

4. Have you looked into a more hierarchical grouping and view model? Our grouping allows a nested hierarchy and provides a great way to segment your monitored infrastructure for better performance and workflow simplicity.

 

Also, have you looked into our hierarchical scorecards as well? I would be interested to understand your potential use cases for that level of data and what your scale requirements would be? As I mentioned, our current limit is 500 rows but we are looking to increase (our goal would be up to 5,000 rows). 

 

There's some work that needs to be done from a query optimization perspective and we've been looking into that. It's tricky to ensure good scale AND good performance. At least that's what they tell me!

 

I'm going to set this to "wish-llst" but let's keep communicating through this idea. What you're looking for is inline with our direction so there's a good chance we can build some great value here.

 

Thanks again for the idea!

 

-Jason