This discussion has been locked. The information referenced herein may be inaccurate due to age, software updates, or external references.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a similar question you can start a new discussion in this forum.

Reporting on Multiple / Child Computer Groups

I frequently use a report to query on a specific WSUS computer group.  I also have a Parent Computer Group with multiple Child Groups in it.  See the picture below for reference.

WSUS Parent and Child Groups.bmp

I would like to run a single report that can query on all of the computers in the Parent Computer AND all of the computers in the Child Groups of the Parent Computer Group.  Is that possible?  If so, what would the report definition look like?  Below is the report definition I currently have.

WSUS Report Template.bmp

thanks

tc

  • Greetings Todd.

    This is possible, but to do it you'll have to explicitly list each child group as an individual group to include in the filter selection. Also, it probably won't be feasible to do it interactively, since you would have to provide the semi-colon delimited group name string in exactly the sequence it's stored in the database. You can do this with a collection of Group Memberships CONTAINS <groupName> filters wrapped in an "Any of the following" header.

    Alternatively, if each member of a child group is also a member of the parent group -- then you could simply query on the parent group. If you're using Group Policy and Client-Side Targeting, this can be done fairly easily by including the parent group along with the child group in a semi-colon delimited list in the text box in the Enable client-side targeting policy setting (e.g. Child Group A; Parent Computer Group). If you're using Server-Side Targeting, you can use the Change Group Membership action in the Patch Manager console to add those child group members to the parent group.

  • Thanks L Garvin. 

    I didn't realize that a client could belong to multiple WSUS Computer Groups!  So I went with the Group Policy Client Side Targeting approach as that seemed easier to maintain in the long run.

    thanks

    tc