3 Replies Latest reply on Jun 11, 2012 3:03 PM by zman

    Side-by-Side migration questions

    cyberdemon Apprentice

      8.8sp3 => 9.x

       

      We currently use Control Panel/Scheduled Tasks that execute Robocopy scripts to disseminate patch and packages shares across our preferred servers and has been solid for 4 years without issues.

       

      One specific question I have is, am I able to set up the same scripts/shares using Robocopy to the same existing Preferred servers/shares as to make the transition easier? or...Do i need to recreate new shares (essentially duplicating and taking up more HD space when the patch and packages directories could be re-used in my thought process)?

       

      Other more general questions are:

       

      1) is the share setup identical from 8.8 to 9.0?

      2) how are preferred servers setup? Are they the same as 8.8 as i remember it?

      3) DFS....do we use it instead?

      4) can the SDMCache "life" be controlled? example, make the cache stay on client side for shorter period of time than the default is. Is this controlled by the Agent or server side or not configurable?

       

      Server 2003 = preferred servers

      Server 2003 = 8.8 LDMS server

      Server 2008 = new 9.0 VM server

       

      Thanks,

        • 1. Re: Side-by-Side migration questions
          zman Master

          Little hard to follow but I will try:

           

          One specific question I have is, am I able to set up the same scripts/shares using Robocopy to the same existing Preferred servers/shares as to make the transition easier? or...Do i need to recreate new shares (essentially duplicating and taking up more HD space when the patch and packages directories could be re-used in my thought process)?

          You can use the same robocopy scripts and existing preferred servers. You will need to setup the preferred servers on your 9.0 server.  You can use the same shares.

           

          Other more general questions are:

           

          1) is the share setup identical from 8.8 to 9.0?

          2) how are preferred servers setup? Are they the same as 8.8 as i remember it?

          3) DFS....do we use it instead?

          4) can the SDMCache "life" be controlled? example, make the cache stay on client side for shorter period of time than the default is. Is this controlled by the Agent or server side or not configurable?

           

          1. If you are referring to the package shares, yes pretty much the same.
          2. Preferred servers are pretty much the same in 8.8 to 9.0.
          3. You can use preferred servers and DFS as long as the the DFS coincided with preferred servername (e.g. \\dfs name\packages, \\preferred server\packages)
          4. sdmcache can be controlled by hacking registry key. http://community.landesk.com/support/docs/DOC-2309
          1 of 1 people found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Side-by-Side migration questions
            cyberdemon Apprentice

            Appreciate the advice, Zman. You are a gentlemen and a saint.

             

            One other question. What is the difference between Content Replication and DFS? I guess I'm trying to wrap my head around what I have heard, is that LD9 supports/uses DFS, yet I don't see a specific DFS tool/functional scope within the Console. I do however see Content Replication and perhaps this is what DFS is referred to as, or I'm completely missing the boat on DFS. I've done some quick DFS searches in the Help feature of LDMS ? help, and nothing that seems to be helpful to me as far as DFS explanation/implementation/real world usage, etc. But, it does bring up one page pertaining to Content Replication, so it must be DFS related. I read in a post where you still use Robocopy (at least you once did) here: http://community.landesk.com/support/message/60226 It seems that DFS is more of a Microsoft thing, than a LANDesk thing.

             

            If you still use Robocopy vs What LDMS 9 uses, then may I ask why or your thoughts on this?

             

            I'm trying to keep the migration simple and it's just as easy to copy the robocopy scripts/windows scheduled tasks over to our LDMS 9 server, as it is to learn some new fangled LD 9 feature that I read in several threads that have issues or had issues in the past. But, perhaps you have a suggestive sway one way or another. Of course, I value your opinion about this topic (data replication amongst preferred servers). Perhaps it's better that I use LANDesk's method as technology changes and not get lagged behind in such things. Or it's better that old school methods continue to amaze the youth movement..... Ok, getting a little weird now..

             

            thanks for your help as always Zman.

            • 3. Re: Side-by-Side migration questions
              zman Master

              What is the difference between Content Replication and DFS?

              • Content Replication = LANDesk.
              • DFS = Microsoft.

               

              You can set them up to accomplish roughly the same thing - replication of files/folders. You can use Content Replication where DFS does not exist. LDMS supports DFS, meaning you can deploy from DFS shares. I don't use LDMS content replication since I believe robocopy is much simpler, doe snot create weird hard links, does not need a client on the box (e.g., NAS filers), I can run many multiple robocopy scripts at once, etc... There are many ERs pertaining to Content Replication.

               

              You need to pick the best solution for your shop. I looked at content replication and the benefits and liabilities, etc... compared to my very simplistic custjob calling robocopy and it was a no brainer - robocopy. If they fix/update content replication then I will reconsider.  However don't hold your breath on ERs

               

              http://community.landesk.com/support/ideas/2400
              http://community.landesk.com/support/ideas/2415
              http://community.landesk.com/support/ideas/2646
              http://community.landesk.com/support/ideas/2547

               

              Sometime a gentleman, never a saint.