Hi Denis, > Hello, list. > > There are two columns for each object: "asset tag" and "barcode". There > is also a story behind them. Long time ago the initial > implementation of RackTables had to serve a hardware base, which was > accounted by two independent systems at once (don't ask me, why). > One system used labels without a barcode, and another --- labels > with barcode. So at that time I added two fixed columns into SQL > table and that did the trick. Later it became obvious, that > enterprises normally employ only one asset accounting systems, but > the columns were already there, and user's data also was. So I left > things as was. > > Now I consider dismissing the "barcode" column in favor of "asset > tag" this year. There are ways to handle existing data: > > 1. Append the contents of "barcode" to "asset tag". > > 2. Create an optional "barcode" attribute and move the "barcode" > fixed column data there. > 3. Something else, perhaps. > > To make the right decision, it is necessary to know, how you, > RackTables users, use these columns. Could you choose, which answer > describes your case best? > > - I don't store values in either "barcode" or "asset tag" columns > - I store 1 value in "barcode" column only > - I store 1 value in "asset tag" column only 1 value (the serial number) is stored in the asset tag column. > - I store values in both "barcode" and "asset tag" columns, they are > different > - I always store the same value in both "barcode" and "asset tag" > columns I'd like to barcode servers / devices but it's unlikely to do so when about 30% of the gear is co-located servers/devices which we only manage and don't own. So the Asset tag (containing the serial number) is the only thing I can see us ever using. Michael. > Thank you in advance. > > -- > Denis Ovsienko ------- End of Original Message -------