|
Skep's Pick: A CMDB is like a Swiss bank account This link is here because...(hover) Confusion between CMDB and Configuration Management
As it becomes clearer that CMDB is a flawed concept, I'm seeing occurences of folk talking about CMDB as a process rather than a thing. It isn't. CMDB is the (nutty) thing. Configuration Management is the perfectly sensible process associated with it - and often forgotten.
Take for example (and it is only an example - there are more but this is the most recent I saw which reminded me of this phenomenon) this recent report from Forrester. Apparently we need a CMDB Manager. Is this over and above a Configuration Manager, or have they just forgotten that role?
Sounds to me like the latter, but let's give the benefit of the doubt and assume the former: that we need a CMDB manager in addition to a Configuration Manager. Oh my, CMDB isn't getting any easier is it? It gets worse.
Managers plural???? This report is of course only available to the analyst's hosts/clients, but according to this article from Network World
Reports to head of infrastructure and operations? Maybe they have forgotten the Configuration Manager after all. The Network World article confuses technology and process too (this may be a quote from Forrester - it is not clear): the CMDB is not about rolling out a single product but more about shifting best practices to support a collection of up-to-date and inter-related configuration and change metrics about IT infrastructure and applications No it isn't. That is Configuration Management process. Buy your books here to support this blog: |
Blog




















Made in New Zealand 
Recent comments