vRealize Orchestrator: Standardised Logger Action

One bugbear that I have with vRO is the limitation around system (console) logging. There is currently no way to dynamically output the name of an action or sub-workflow (see end of the post). I like to see exactly which action or workflow is executing code so that it makes it easier for me to find that code to troubleshoot when I am looking at the output logs.

It is possible to use ‘workflow.name’ or ‘this.name’ inside an action, but this will always be set to the name of the initial workflow that was executed. This is because the workflow object is implicitly passed to the action that is called. The result, is that it will look like all the code is executing from the workflow (which is technically true, but I needed more granularity).

I therefore created a standardised way that workflow and action logging should be handled. This is achieved by using an action that will actually handle all the logging for me. The idea is, that an action or workflow will call the ‘logger‘ action, providing some parameters, that allow for a consistent and useful logging experience.

Here is some example output of the logger action in use:

You can clearly see that the outputs are from an ‘Action‘ followed by the name of the action and then the actual log message.

Below is the logger action that I am using (this is the only action I have that does not conform to my template).

The action takes 4 parameters (inputs)

  • logType – Should be set to ‘Action‘ or ‘Workflow‘.
  • logName – Should be set to the ‘Action‘ or ‘Workflow‘ name.
  • logLevel – The log level, one of ‘log‘, ‘warn‘, ‘error‘, ‘debug‘.
  • logMessage – The message to output to the console (can also be a non-string such as an object)

To use this action in any of my other actions, I place the following lines of code inside the variable block.

And simply use the following line anywhere/everywhere that I want to perform some form of logging output.

You can see that I am passing 4 parameters to the ‘logger‘ function, which match the inputs for the logger action that is being called. In the above example, “log” has been set, but this can also be any of “debug“, “error” or “warn“. It will default to “log” if for some reason no valid value has been specified.

There is one overhead that you are probably thinking about and that is, yes, you need to manually set the variable ‘logName‘ to match the name of the action itself. This seems a bit dull at first, but in my experience, action names very rarely change.

Identifying the action name from the underlying Rhino function

I mentioned at the start of this post that there is no way to dynamically set the name of the action. There is, however, a way in which this can be achieved using the following:

All vRO actions are just functions implemented in Rhino, with a prefix applied. The above code retrieves the function name and extracts the action name from it.

However, it is highly recommended that you do not use this as it has been restricted in future releases of ECMAScript, could potentially be removed from vRO and is very costly to execute, which is going to slow your workflows down considerably.

I hope this is useful and as always, any suggestions or comments then please let me know.

vRealize Orchestrator: Standardising Modules & Actions

Managing your code base in vRealize Orchestrator can be quite challenging and complex. Often, you won’t realise this until you’ve reached a point where it becomes difficult and time consuming to both organise or locate existing code that you have written. In this post, I am going to suggest ways to help you organise your code better, using methods that I have adopted with my time using vRO.

I am not suggesting this be the perfect solution, but it should provide a working standard to adopt to your own needs. I would also argue that the extra time spent getting this in place on the outset, will lead to time saved later on.

Just for reference, from this point on, I am going to refer to ‘code base‘ and ‘actions‘ interchangeably, because your vRO actions ARE your code base. Almost every single line of code you write in vRO should be in an action (I will discuss this in more detail in a later post which I will link here).


Modules are quite a simple topic but it’s important to get them right as they are almost impossible to change later. Modules are used to organise or group a collection of actions together by a common function.

Here are some general principles I like to follow when creating modules: As a general rule, modules should:

  • Conform to a standard naming convention;
  • Allow developers to easily find existing actions or where to create new actions. Failure to address this point will result in developers re-inventing the wheel by writing new actions for which may already exist;
  • Always be lower case alphabetical characters using dot notation;
  • Always have a utility module for storing general ‘helper’ actions i.e. an action that returns a unique array of items

So generally, if you follow a standard naming convention for your module names then you’ll be set. I have found that the following naming convention works well:



[company] = company name as a single word

[component] = Examples are: NSX, vCAC, Infoblox, Activedirectory

[interface] – Examples are: REST, SOAP, PS (this is not needed if using a plugin)

[objects] = Parent object branch of the component, i.e. Edges, Entities, Networks, Groups

[object] = A property or object branch of the parent objects. These can contain actions that target a single object (singular)

Here is an example of what (some) of my Zerto Rest API code library looks like:

You could just create a module where the branch stops at [interface] or [objects], but what you’ll find is that it will become a dumping ground for dozens of actions, which will become difficult to maintain. Adding additional branches helps break the modules up.

The strategy around creating these branches usually goes in line with the interface/API’s, which helps align your modules quite nicely. A good module branching strategy can also provide execution performance enhancements by calling the module once for a smaller number of required actions.


Here are some general principles I like to follow when creating actions: As a general rule, actions should:

  • Contain small, manageable chunks of code that perform a specific task. Actions are just functions and just like any function, it should contain code that performs a specific task. If your action is doing many different tasks, then consider breaking these down into multiple, smaller actions.
  • Validate inputs. I appreciate that some may debate this idea, but actions are not ‘private functions’. They are public code where you can never guarantee that the action ‘caller’ is properly validating its inputs. This is the nature of vRO, it is a ‘hub’ that has many different uses cases and scenarios for executing the same actions. I have seen dozens of cases where developers and support engineers have wasted time tracking unexpected errors;
  • Be named appropriate to the task they perform. I generally like to use verbs in my action names, like, ‘getVirtualMachineNames’, ‘getVirtualMachineNetworks’ or ‘setCustomProperty’. Actions named this way will make it easier for other developers to identify what they are used for;
  • Have variables declared in a single block. This will just make it easier to see what variables are being used. The data type can also be defined, but is not always necessary or as important;
  • Provide consistent logging throughout. Make it so, the action almost tells the story of what is happening. Don’t go overboard, but generally a before, during and after style to logging works quite well;
  • Nesting actions within an action is generally ‘OK’ but keep it to a minimum if possible. Too many nested actions can create depth that may be more difficult to maintain and troubleshoot later on. Typical use cases are ‘helper’ or ‘utility’ actions (you’ll be completely forgiven with actions used for workflow presentation as these are a pain);
  • Perform singular tasks. Don’t write actions that perform plural tasks. Write the singular version first, then use a looping mechanism that re-uses the singular action (there are also ways this can be achieved with performance in mind in vRO). This way you’ll only have 1 version of the code;
  • Be based on a user-defined template. Yup, I’m not crazy. Have a defined template (aka boilerplate) set out on how an action should generally look and have the team follow this. It will make code reviews far easier;
  • Always be camel cased alphabetical characters (no dots);

If you adopt the above principles, you’ll have actions that will be much easier to understand, maintain and troubleshoot and everyone will be a happy bunny.

Action Example

Here is a working example of an action that has been based on a template.

Action Template

And here is the template:

If you’re wondering about the ‘logger‘ action, you can read my post here.

I hope this helps provides some standards around your vRO code base. If you have suggestions, comments, etc. then please let me know as I’ll be glad to hear them and value every bit of feedback.

Using the indexOf() method for Arrays and Strings for vRO and vRA

I’ve never been a developer so getting into JavaScript was quite a challenge at first and I probably always went the longest route possible to achieve something. As I use it more and more, I am picking up these neat little tricks and uses for built in methods that make my life easier.

In the world of vRA and vRO, I find that most of my time is spent iterating over arrays or parsing custom properties. One method that I have come to find extremely useful is the indexOf() that is available on Arrays and Strings. The methods are very similar but have very different use cases. Let’s take a look at each of them in turn.

String indexOf() Method

w3schools.com defines this as:

The indexOf() method returns the position of the first occurrence of a specified value in a string.

This method returns -1 if the value to search for never occurs.

So as an example, if we had the string “simplygeek.co.uk is fun”

string.indexOf(“m”) would return 2, which is the index within the string that ‘m’ first appears. Note that if ‘m’ appeared twice then only the first match would return a result. Indexes within arrays and strings always start at 0.

Another use case, one which I find the most useful, is being able to provide a string for the lookup. Take the following example:

string.indexOf(“simplygeek”) would return 0, because in a contiguous match the first index is returned.

When writing JavaScript that interacts with vRA you are often required to parse through custom properties, which are key value pairs of data. Such properties can contain useful information that relates to a deployment, such as virtual machine configuration. If custom properties follow a standardised naming convention, it can be easy to discover a set of properties. Let’s assume I have created the following custom properties in vRA for a deployment:

Custom.Deployment.Virtualmachine.Config.hotcpu : true
Custom.Deployment.Virtualmachine.Config.hotmem : true
Custom.Deployment.Virtualmachine.Config.sched.swap.vmxSwapEnabled : true

When the payload is sent to my vRO workflow it could contain over a 100 different key:value pairs of data. To find these easily I can use the indexOf method to iterate over each pair as follows:

The above will result in an array of properties related to virtual machine configs. I can then pass this array to some code that will handle the implementation of these advanced virtual machine settings. This allows for a very dynamic way to manage custom properties in property groups within vRA.

Array indexOf() method

Very similar to the String method, on an array, the indexOf() method returns the first index at which a given element can be found in the array, or -1 if it is not present. I find this method useful when I need to return a set of unique values from another array. let’s assume we have the following array:

myArray = [‘one’, ‘two’, ‘two’, ‘three’, ‘three’, ‘three’]

If I wanted to return only unique items from myArray, I could use the indexOf method as follows:

The above code will result in an array:

[‘one’, ‘two’, ‘three’]

I hope that someone else finds these as useful as I have. If you know of more use cases, then please let me know.

vRO Coding Pet Hate – Badly formed IF statements

I was optimising some vRO actions today and came across something that always annoys me when I see it, badly formed IF statements (for one of a better description). When I write my code, I have learned that formatting and consistency is key to produce code that is easier to read and understand. I also like to keep things simple. However, I am constantly surprised at how much sloppy coding practices I encounter from the code that is shipped with vRO. Here are a couple of small examples of the kind of thing I am talking about.

Both of the above statements are pretty much identical in how they function. They are checking if a given variable is null (or not) and if the condition returns ‘true’ then execute the following statement. As you can see from the code snippets above, the structure of these statements are different. Why? Because this is a valid way to write conditionals in JavaScript, if you are only performing an action when the result is ‘true’. That said, it doesn’t mean we should use it in practice. The reason for this, is that it forces a lack of consistency in your code (which you can already see from the code above).

If we wanted to add another action for a result that returns ‘false’, we would need to add an ‘else’ clause. With the conditional statements above, we wouldn’t be able to do this as it would require adding curly braces so that the interpreter knows when to apply the correct code based on the result. Here is an example.

This is the structure that I like to adhere to every time I write a conditional. I also apply the ‘4 spaces rule’ for my indentation (and don’t get me started on the use of tab!). The two code snippets revised using this structure would look like:

I believe this is a much neater approach for the sake of a few more lines, which aren’t worth saving if the code is more readable.

Get a list of Datastores, quickly, using XPATH

The vCenter plugin has a very useful method for retrieving a list of objects quickly and easily. However, if your inventory is quite large, then this can be quite slow. There are two ways that this can be improved. 1) only retrieve the attributes that are useful for our code requirements, 2) use an XPATH query filter to limit the scope of the search.

In my situation there were over a 100 Datastores but I only wanted to retrieve a list based on a given prefix (of which there were less than 10). The Datastore names end with an incrementing number and I wanted to return all of these in an array.

I have used a similar approach which allowed me to retrieve several thousand virtual machines in approximately 3-5 seconds.