function addAffectedCis() {
var ciu = new CIUtils2();
var affectedcis = ciu.cisAffectedByTask(current.cmdb_ci, ‘ALL’);
var m2m = new GlideRecord(‘task_ci’);
for (var i = 0; i < affectedcis.length; i++) {
m2m.initialize();
m2m.task = current.sys_id;
m2m.ci_item = affectedcis[i];
m2m.insert();
}
}

So I get the Script Include part; what I’m not so good at is the scripting for calling the script include.

The ‘get impacted services’ UI action is what I’m trying to base a custom one on…but I don’t know what the script should look like or what a couple of lines of code the impacted services one are for.

I created a CIUtils2 script include, essentially copied and pasted the script you have above – but not sure what to put into UI action to actually call it.

I want to primarily pull all upstream affected CIs and apply them to the Change record.

What exactly do I change in this script to do that? Not sure what function should be or the m2m.cmdb_ci_services line should be to call ‘all’ upstream regardless of class. Help? Thanks!

function addAffectedServices() {
var ciu = new CIUtils2();
var services = ciu.cisAffectedByTask(current.cmdb_ci, [“ALL”]);
var m2m = new GlideRecord(‘task_cmdb_ci’);
for (var i = 0; i < services.length; i++) {
m2m.initialize();
m2m.task = current.sys_id;
m2m.cmdb_ci_service = services[i];
m2m.manually_added = 'false';
m2m.insert();
}

Hi Erite,

We have a similar requirement. Could you please share the CIUtils3 which you have developed.

Thanks in advance.

It’s telling you that ‘TaskGlideRecord’ isn’t defined. You need to set that variable somewhere up above (or pass in ‘current’ to the function instead).

org.mozilla.javascript.EcmaError: “TaskGlideRecord” is not defined.
Caused by error in at line 2

1: var ciu = new CIUtils2();
==> 2: var services = ciu.cisAffectedByTask(TaskGlideRecord, [ALL]);

I had to remove the “” from ALL as the syntax checker didn’t like them. Any ideas what is being don wrong?

Intriguing. So, when establishing a relationship using a CI that potentially has an impact upstream, you should never use a “sideways” relationship (i.e. reverse the direction of dependencies). They should always be “vertical,” correct?

Forget about the descriptors, several of those provided out-of-box aren’t correct and they’re just labels anyway. I was just putting those in there as an example and wasn’t intending to prescribe any particular relationship type. The point is that your parent-child relationships need to flow down from the Business Services/Applications. They should be the parent of everything else and your Racks, etc. would generally be at the bottom-most level. You want the impact to flow up to the parent in every case.

As far as your storage volumes/arrays, you need to look at the impact relationship there as well. What is impacted if your storage array goes down? The thing that is impacted should be a parent to the storage array. In that case you’ll probably have many parents.

But “contained by” is a child descriptor, right? So what you wrote is actually what we have

Also, how would you correctly relate storage volumes/arrays or databases in a proper BSM map?