It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

What is the best approach to consolidate disparate RQM 2.x and RTC 3.0.1.1 instances onto a single CLM instance on WAS?


Brian Fleming (1.6k11928) | asked May 06 '13, 5:03 p.m.
retagged May 08 '13, 12:17 p.m. by Lisa Caten (342913)
Assuming the existing environment is RQM 2.0.1.x on qmserver.com/jazz, RTC 3.0.1.1 on ccmserver.com/ccm, and JTS 3.0.1.1 on ccmserver.com/jts what is the suggested way to consolidate these to a common CLM 4.0.1 server?  Are there drawbacks or alternatives to the high level approach below? 
  1. Upgrade RQM from 2.0.1.x to 3.0.1.1 on qmserver.com/jazz, pointing to JTS on ccmserver.com/jts
  2. Upgrade JTS and RTC on ccmserver.com from 3.0.1.1 to 4.0.1
  3. Upgrade RQM from 3.0.1.1 to 4.0.1 on qmserver.com/jazz
  4. Perform server rename on qmserver.com/jazz to ccmserver.com/qm


Comments
Rosa Naranjo commented May 07 '13, 10:54 a.m.
FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER

Brian, what, if any, reporting is configured for this environment? Was RQM 2.x using what is called Rational common reporting? Is RTC 3011 and JTS 3011 configured with a data warehouse at this time? Please see this topic for more information:  Reporting and the Upgrade Process


Brian Fleming commented May 08 '13, 2:35 p.m.

Thanks for the information Rosa.  They don't use Insight yet, but plan to after these upgrades.  Current reporting is done through csv exports and Excel.

Accepted answer


permanent link
Rosa Naranjo (2.9k11423) | answered May 07 '13, 10:39 a.m.
FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER
I have reviewed the 301 infocenter and you can use an existing JTS 301 for your 2x to 3x QM migration. Be careful what parameters you use for the upgrade scripts or the repotools scripts so that you do not overwrite the JTS tables.  Basically, do not use the 'createTables' parameter.

Leave the QM server in its existing physical server, until you have upgraded all apps to 40x.  Then tackle the reverse proxy issue.

Quoting from Moving Jazz Servers and URI Stability with CLM 2011:
Setting up a reverse proxy server will allow you to retain the previous public server root URI, while hosting the application on a server with a different name.

In your case, preserve QM public URI 'http://qmserver.com/jazz', but host the application on ccmserver.com/qm or ccmserver.com/jazz, the host URI choice doesn't matter, as long as the reverse proxy redirect is accurate.  You want to preserve the ability to handle incoming requests to the existing public URI for QM but have the reverse proxy handle the redirect.

References of InterestConfiguring Enterprise CLM Reverse Proxies, Part 2: WebSphere and IHS Plugin method
Configuring Enterprise CLM Reverse Proxies: WebSphere and IHS Plugin method Separating JTS and CCM where the JTS and CCM were originally deployed using different ports
Brian Fleming selected this answer as the correct answer

One other answer



permanent link
Anthony Kesterton (7.5k7178136) | answered May 06 '13, 5:12 p.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER
You may have a problem here.  There is no way to merge a JTS with another one - so unless Step 1 can point to an existing JTS and merge in the data - you will not be able to do this.

It may be worth talking to support about this too.

anthony

Comments
Brian Fleming commented May 06 '13, 5:31 p.m.

Thanks Anthony, you could be right.  The statement below, from http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/clmhelp/v3r0m1/topic/com.ibm.jazz.install.doc/topics/c_upgrade_rqm_overview.html made me think it would be possible to merge an RQM 2.x Jazz Server to an existing 3.0.1 JTS

The second scenario assumes that you have already upgraded to Jazz Team Server version 3.0.1 for one of several reasons:

  • You have already upgraded one of the other CLM products and now want to upgrade Rational Quality Manager.
  • You have already upgraded the Jazz Team Server and Rational Quality Manager to version 3, and now you want to upgrade a second Rational Quality Manager version 2 server.


1
Rosa Naranjo commented May 07 '13, 10:03 a.m.
FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER

It is possible Brian. I'm brushing up my memory and knowledge of the 2x to 3x upgrade scenarios and will reply with some more details soon. 

I do not believe you need to perform step #4 which should only be used as a last resort due to performance reasons. But,instead you should introduce a reverse proxy into your topology or use WAS virtual hosts to achieve what you would like on a single server.

Your answer


Register or to post your answer.