Assets duplicating in WHD.... this is not good

After working with SW tech support for a bit, I have arrived at the conclusion that there is a major bug in this software.  I have many assets in my database with duplicate entries, I have assets with attributes that are no longer correct and/or crossed up with other assets, and I have assets that are missing entirely.  Serial numbers are now listed as the wrong make/model, associated with the wrong user, etc.  My asset database, and presumably any ticket history per asset that I now have, are compromised.  I have to physically verify my inventory again and reassociate machines with users as necessary.

The problem seems to stem from a flaw in the manner in which the IP address is used in conjunction with other data to determine the ID of the machine.  If a device's IP address happens to change, as will be the case in a DHCP environment, some asset attributes appear to follow the IP address, while other attributes appear to follow either the asset ID number assigned by WHD or possibly the MAC address.  Whatever is happening, it definitely is not right and my asset database is trashed.

I have asked that the case be escalated and will update here when I learn more.

Is anyone else having such issues?

I have had similar issues, but they dont seem to be IP address related, they seem to stem back to doing a data import of new assets.  A lot of devices mixed up serial numbers with makes/models.  I also have occasional issues with bulk updating fields, I sometimes have corrupt data in date fields, and sometimes the fields dont upate with the values I have added.

We had the exact same issues using the built-in WMI discovery. It was using the IP address as the unique identifier and in a DHCP environment it's not usable. Why it doesn't just sync based on the Serial Number is what I don't understand.

We abandoned the WMI discovery as it just created way to many frustrations and mixed up asset information.

I can see why they would want to use a combination of parameters to ensure a device is uniquely identified, but I am convinced there is a bug in the logic they use to include the IP address within these parameters.  WMI data and DHCP data agree with each other and show one thing, and the WHD asset data shows something completely different.  And once records get attributes mixed up, it's hopeless.

Does anyone from SW read these posts?  I have asked the support tech managing my case to escalate it because he keeps going around in circles, and he won't let go of it and do as I ask.  It's getting frustrating.

Sometimes. Though it helps to tag them! milan.hulik​ are there any plans to fix this issue in the next update? We don't use WMI discovery because of this issue, and support hasn't been able to help - mostly, I think, because it's an actual software bug and/or poor design.

Not in the next update. But this problem is very high on my priority list.

Right now I can only recommend to use different asset discovery tool and integrate it with WHD.

Some customers use Lansweeper integration with WHD for asset discovery.

LanSweeper Integration

Are you using other Asset Management / Inventory solutions with WHD?

Thank you.  Not the answer I was hoping for, but certainly helpful and appreciated.

If I move to Lansweeper or another tool at this point, shall I presume that my asset database will start from scratch?  If so, I feel like I just need to do it sooner than later.

I appreciate your response and look forward to updates that resolve this issue.

I think, the safe answer here is yes - you'll likely have to start from scratch.

It's crystal clear after being forwarded to another engineer at SolarWinds that this is a massive design flaw in the software.  They are trying to pin the blame for this on my DHCP lease time.

Sorry, I don't care if my lease time is set to 3 minutes or 5 years.  If my asset tracking software randomly assigns computers to different users, changes model numbers, duplicates records, deletes records, and who knows what else, you can't blame that on the IP address changing.  It's ridiculous.

I'm trying to decide if this software is even usable if the integrity of the underlying asset data can't be guaranteed.

I am not saying, it is not a design flaw

We are aware of this issue and support is just trying to give you workarounds, that might help you with short-term resolution.

Long-term, we'd like to fix it.