DOORS Server and Client versions

Our DOORS client version is 9.3.0.3, and our server version is 9.2.0.5. Our customer is 9.3.0.3 versions on both client and server.

Our customer is asking for an export of the XYZ module from the our DOORS database to import into their DOORS. Is it possible to do the export into something that they can import? Is their compatibility close enough to let this happen?

Any help will be grately appreciated.
ashokanumula - Thu Jan 19 16:10:04 EST 2012

Re: DOORS Server and Client versions
llandale - Thu Jan 19 16:55:09 EST 2012

You MUST upgrade your server software to v9306; v9305 and v9304 (and I think v9303) have a very serious corruption bug. There is no such need to upgrade the clients.

Yes, all v9x DOORS version's archives are combatible with each other. One can archive at v9399 and another restore with v9000 no problem.

-Louie

Re: DOORS Server and Client versions
ashokanumula - Thu Jan 19 17:06:42 EST 2012

llandale - Thu Jan 19 16:55:09 EST 2012
You MUST upgrade your server software to v9306; v9305 and v9304 (and I think v9303) have a very serious corruption bug. There is no such need to upgrade the clients.

Yes, all v9x DOORS version's archives are combatible with each other. One can archive at v9399 and another restore with v9000 no problem.

-Louie

Thanks Louie.

Re: DOORS Server and Client versions
kbmurphy - Fri Jan 20 02:12:19 EST 2012

llandale - Thu Jan 19 16:55:09 EST 2012
You MUST upgrade your server software to v9306; v9305 and v9304 (and I think v9303) have a very serious corruption bug. There is no such need to upgrade the clients.

Yes, all v9x DOORS version's archives are combatible with each other. One can archive at v9399 and another restore with v9000 no problem.

-Louie

Louie,

What do you know about the corruption bug?

Kevin

Re: DOORS Server and Client versions
llandale - Fri Jan 20 10:13:36 EST 2012

kbmurphy - Fri Jan 20 02:12:19 EST 2012
Louie,

What do you know about the corruption bug?

Kevin

We lost an entire section. At one point dude A in Read mode could see section 1.1.2; Dudes B and C in Shared mode, after saving, could not see that section 1.1.2. I failed to get A in shared mode and save, as when he opened it the section was gone.

Gone.

Restored the module from an Archive and copied that section back in; didn't matter that the ObjIDs were different.

Don't know what else we lost; but nobody has complained.

The previous nuisance "fixed" in v9303 was that when two folks in shared saved at the same time, often a particular module lock file was left absent preventing the next dude from opening it at all, even for Read. Solution was for one of the folks currently with it open to issue a save. I think I isolated the file in the database and could have fixed it the hard way but never had to try since someone always had it open shared and could save it.

I'm guessing that the fix of this bug introduced the far more serious lost-section bug, which seems to be fixed in v9306.

-Louie

Seems to me the Integrity checker did not resolve the problem.

I'm guessing Mathias and a few others could have resolved the problem with clever manipulation of key database files but that's far beyond me and I have no intention of trying, chicken that I am.