Community
- Command Central
- MVP Program
- Monthly Mission
- Blogs
- Groups
- Events
- Media Vault
Products
- Observability
- Network Management
- Application Management
- IT Security
- IT Service Management
- System Management
- Database Management
Content Exchange
- SolarWinds Platform
- Server & Application Monitor
- Database Performance Analyzer
- Server Configuration Monitor
- Network Performance Monitor
- Network Configuration Manager
- SQL Sentry
- Web Help Desk
Free Tools & Trials

Getting Application Template Description using SWQL?

Hey all,

I'm trying to create a report of applications that are running on my nodes, but it's going to staff that aren't familiar with SolarWinds and template names. So I thought to include the Application Template Description field in my SWQL, but I can't seem to find the data in SWQL studio anywhere.

For reference, here is the field in the UI:

I can find it through Database Manager on the Polling Engine under APM_ApplicationTemplate table:

but the corresponding table in SWQL studio just has it 'NULL':

Anyone achieved this before?

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

jm_sysadmin

I wish I could help, but it should be where you are looking and I don't think it is anywhere else. Last time I did something similar I exported all my templates to xml and parsed the XML. Ugly but I got the inventory.

All comments

jm_sysadmin

marlief22

Hey, thanks for chipping in - Just knowing that it's not just me is good. I can go down the route of SQL if it's really needed.

Seashore

Hmmm

If you run:

SELECT TOP 100
name, description
FROM Orion.APM.ApplicationTemplate with QUERYSTATS

you can see the SQL query orion is asking. You then get this:

SET DATEFIRST 7;
SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ COMMITTED;
SELECT TOP (100)
[T1].[Name] AS C1
, NULL AS C2
FROM dbo.APM_ApplicationTemplateStorage AS T1

"NULL as C2"

It hides the description for us. I wonder why...

KMSigma.SWI

Because the "Description" (like many Inherited Properties) is custom generated based on the type of element queried... and we didn't write that one yet (as far as I know) because there wasn't a critical reason to prioritize it.