Computer group computers not sync'd with upstream server archers 12/5/2008 3:50:05 PM We use WSUS 3 in a fairly basic setup namely, 1 upstream server with 14 downstream replica's. We have created 10 computer groups in addition to the system generated "unassigned" and "all computers". The computer groups are manually populated (ie we don't use client side targetting in GPO although all other WSUS settings come from GPO) on the replica servers once they appear in Unassigned. If, on a replica server, we add a computer to a test group (in addition to it's normal Windows XP group in which it resides) the computer eventually appears in the Upstream servers test group. Patches are approved for the test group and the computer is duly patched. However when testing is complete we remove the PC from the test group on the replica server. BUT.... the computer remains in the Upstreams servers test group forever more. This means that despite there currently being no computers in any test group on any downstream server, the upstream server shows literally hundreds of computers being tested. I think this is a display Issue and has no operational significance but I assumed that synchronisation would have cleared the upstream servers group in line with clearances on the replica's group. Is this correct behaviour or is there some config issue that I need to resolve ? Problem Summary :- Upstream server "test" group shows computers that are no longer in the "test" groups on the replica servers. Why ? Any help would be much appreciated.

Re: Computer group computers not sync'd with upstream server "Lawrence Garvin \(MVP\)" <lawrence[ at ]news.postalias> 12/5/2008 7:17:53 PM "archers" <archers[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:BE3259F8-8C7F-488F-99DD-0D8CE012E675[ at ]microsoft.com... [Quoted Text] > If, on a replica server, we add a computer to a test group (in addition to > it's normal Windows XP group in which it resides) the computer eventually > appears in the Upstream servers test group. Patches are approved for the > test > group and the computer is duly patched. However when testing is complete > we > remove the PC from the test group on the replica server. BUT.... the > computer > remains in the Upstreams servers test group forever more. > > This means that despite there currently being no computers in any test > group > on any downstream server, the upstream server shows literally hundreds of > computers being tested. > > I think this is a display Issue and has no operational significance but I > assumed that synchronisation would have cleared the upstream servers group > in > line with clearances on the replica's group. > > Is this correct behaviour or is there some config issue that I need to > resolve ? This is, unfortunately perhaps, by design. Reporting rollup is a unidirectional feature. Information from the replica servers is sent to the upstream server. Unless an Admin tells the upstream server that a computer no longer exists, the events and reporting records for that computer will remain in the database on the upstream server indefinitely -- as would any local machine permanently removed from a group, or the network. To assist with this scenario, however, the Server Cleanup Wizard allows you to remove computers from the database that have not "contacted" the server in the past 30 days. -- Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP(x2), MCTS(x5), MCP(x7), MCBMSP Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009) MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com; http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Lawrence.Garvin

Re: Computer group computers not sync'd with upstream server archers 12/8/2008 12:40:03 PM Thanks for your detailed and informative response. I'm still slightly confused however. Could you possibly expand a little on the workings of the rollup reporting ? My view was that the replica, when synchronising would say something to the effect of "I've 4 clients in my test group named ....., I've 256 clients in my WinXP group named ......., I've 165 clients in my laptops group named.... and I've 34 clients in my server group named...". At which time the upstream server would show those devices in the corresponding groups on it's database. However I also assumed, maybe wrongly if I understood your post correctly, that the upstream server would recognise that a client had left one group and make the appropriate change in it's database. It appears from what I see on my network that the upstream server is quite willing to add a new client to a group but is reluctant to subsequently remove it, even though that client is active within the network and reporting in to it's designated replica server several times a day. The replica server itself synchronising with the upstream server each evening. Havig read your post I think that my knowledge of the reporing rollup is sadly lacking ! "Lawrence Garvin (MVP)" wrote: [Quoted Text] > "archers" <archers[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:BE3259F8-8C7F-488F-99DD-0D8CE012E675[ at ]microsoft.com... > > > If, on a replica server, we add a computer to a test group (in addition to > > it's normal Windows XP group in which it resides) the computer eventually > > appears in the Upstream servers test group. Patches are approved for the > > test > > group and the computer is duly patched. However when testing is complete > > we > > remove the PC from the test group on the replica server. BUT.... the > > computer > > remains in the Upstreams servers test group forever more. > > > > This means that despite there currently being no computers in any test > > group > > on any downstream server, the upstream server shows literally hundreds of > > computers being tested. > > > > I think this is a display Issue and has no operational significance but I > > assumed that synchronisation would have cleared the upstream servers group > > in > > line with clearances on the replica's group. > > > > Is this correct behaviour or is there some config issue that I need to > > resolve ? > > > This is, unfortunately perhaps, by design. > > Reporting rollup is a unidirectional feature. Information from the replica > servers is sent to the upstream server. Unless an Admin tells the upstream > server that a computer no longer exists, the events and reporting records > for that computer will remain in the database on the upstream server > indefinitely -- as would any local machine permanently removed from a group, > or the network. > > To assist with this scenario, however, the Server Cleanup Wizard allows you > to remove computers from the database that have not "contacted" the server > in the past 30 days. > > -- > Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP(x2), MCTS(x5), MCP(x7), MCBMSP > Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas > Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009) > > MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus > My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com; > http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com > My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Lawrence.Garvin > >

Re: Computer group computers not sync'd with upstream server "Lawrence Garvin \(MVP\)" <lawrence[ at ]news.postalias> 12/8/2008 3:21:56 PM "archers" <archers[ at ]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:8890FEA7-58D3-47B7-8C1B-4A1CE9EE6087[ at ]microsoft.com... [Quoted Text] > Thanks for your detailed and informative response. I'm still slightly > confused however. Could you possibly expand a little on the workings of > the > rollup reporting ? > > My view was that the replica, when synchronising would say something to > the > effect of "I've 4 clients in my test group named ....., I've 256 clients > in > my WinXP group named ......., I've 165 clients in my laptops group > named.... > and I've 34 clients in my server group named...". At which time the > upstream > server would show those devices in the corresponding groups on it's > database. Correct, to this point. > However I also assumed, maybe wrongly if I understood your post correctly, > that the upstream server would recognise that a client had left one group > and > make the appropriate change in it's database. If the client reports in a *different* group, that information will be updated. If the client fails to report, that will not result in the automatic removal of the client from the database. > It appears from what I see on my network that the upstream server is quite > willing to add a new client to a group but is reluctant to subsequently > remove it, even though that client is active within the network and > reporting > in to it's designated replica server several times a day. Exactly. And this is exactly how a single, standalone WSUS Server works with clients reporting directly to it. Computer systems are not removed from the reporting data tables automatically. You must use the Server Cleanup Wizard to remove stale entries. > Havig read your post I think that my knowledge of the reporing rollup is > sadly lacking ! It really has not much to do with reporting rollup, but rather just the basic concepts of how client data gets into the WSUS Server. As I noted previously, it's a one-way process. The client provides information; the WSUS Server stores it. If nothing *changes* that information (by updating an attritubue of a computer name's reporting information), it stays unchanged. There are *no* provisions in the architecture of WSUS for a client to remove itself from the database. That must be performed by server maintenance using the SCW. Perhaps reviewing the documentation will also help? -- Lawrence Garvin, M.S., MCITP(x2), MCTS(x5), MCP(x7), MCBMSP Principal/CTO, Onsite Technology Solutions, Houston, Texas Microsoft MVP - Software Distribution (2005-2009) MS WSUS Website: http://www.microsoft.com/wsus My Websites: http://www.onsitechsolutions.com; http://wsusinfo.onsitechsolutions.com My MVP Profile: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/Lawrence.Garvin