It's all about the answers!

Ask a question

Need to move a server.


Mark Ireland (26115347) | asked Mar 12 '14, 8:20 a.m.
We have a CLM v4 Server, the plan is to try and move a large portion of the projects off it across to another physical server.

The issues we have are HUGE databases, we would like to be able to clean up the data after the move, ideally delete projects. Is there a way to clean up or source controlled files in CCM archived project?

I understood that the public URL can be modified, with assistance / tool from PMR people is this still the case?

Also is there a move project functionality planned / available ??



Comments
1
N Z commented Mar 12 '14, 5:24 p.m.

I'm sorry, this response is not going to be of any help, but you highlight one of the most appalling aspects of the CLM tools, and that is administration and maintenance. The Move capability has been on the cards for years, the server rename is a hack, managing projects, well, it's very limited! They're only the ones you mentioned, I could go on!


The Jazz Team are so focused on their continuous delivery and sprints, that they forget that large organisations with large installations are more interested in the marathon. 


Erica Tran commented Mar 13 '14, 10:14 a.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER

N Z commented Mar 13 '14, 5:29 p.m.

 I'm sorry Erica, it's one thing to have it recorded in the system, it's another to see some real progress.


That item was opened in 2009! We have been waiting for it for years. And the item is still in Backlog!

As Ralph mentioned, I appreciate it is difficult, but it's largely difficult because your original architecture and design didn't cater for this. It appears you have all painted yourself into a corner.

This is where your development model is flawed, and your incremental releases work against you. Your sales & marketing team are so intent on trying to demonstrate the value of the tools by demonstrating how quickly you can churn our releases, but the downside is that some very important things are ignored or don't get done.


Geoffrey Clemm commented Mar 13 '14, 5:51 p.m. | edited Mar 13 '14, 7:09 p.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER

N Z: I personally agree that the architecture should have supported this from the first place (you'll note my signature on a lot of the earliest requests in this area :-), and I also agree that this is the cause for the difficulty of adding it in later.  But in my view, this is not related in any way to the rapid delivery development model.  If something will take more than one release to implement, we partition it into the appropriate number of releases, keeping code on a separate feature stream when appropriate (the "gap merge" SCM feature for example took 4 releases to complete, if you include the initial exploration phases). Frequent predictably-timed releases ensures that smaller features (and initial increments of larger features) can make it into the hands of the users who would benefit from them without being held up waiting for "all major features to be completed".


N Z commented Mar 13 '14, 7:26 p.m.

Hi Geoff, productive? Probably not! :-) However, we've put in RFE's, spoken to account managers,  voted on requests, and nothing happens. "Venting" here is just another avenue.


I appreciate your comment (I agree with a lot, but not all of it!), but for many reasons which I wont go into, I don't believe Rational have the balance right. In my opinion (very subjective, I'll agree!), they should stop these incremental releases, and spend the next 12 months or so and work on an architecture/maintenance release, which can be used as a platform for really moving forward.

The CLM tool has a lot of potential, but just lets us down in so many ways :-(

One answer



permanent link
Piotr Aniola (3.6k1534) | answered Mar 12 '14, 8:28 a.m.
edited Mar 12 '14, 8:29 a.m.
Hello,

the rename is possible, for example for version 4.0 you can find instructions here:
https://jazz.net/library/article/818

Please note that contacting support is necessary to activate the feature. It is disabled by default to protect the environment from hasty rename attempts.

Move project feature is planned for backlog:
https://jazz.net/jazz/web/projects/Rational%20Team%20Concert#action=com.ibm.team.workitem.viewWorkItem&id=87778

Also, please read this thread for options to reduce the DB size:
https://jazz.net/forum/questions/117448/rtc-is-there-a-way-to-reduce-size-of-current-db-apart-from-change-events-scrubbing

Comments
David Mehaffy commented Mar 12 '14, 9:54 a.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER

Just realize you can not do partial moves with server rename as you suggest you want to do - you have to move the whole server and its repository - server rename does not support splitting of repositories or moving merging of repositories


Ara Masrof commented Mar 12 '14, 10:07 a.m.
JAZZ DEVELOPER

Mark,

Just for clarification, are you trying to move the Database or move the server?

Ara
 


sam detweiler commented Mar 12 '14, 5:38 p.m. | edited Mar 12 '14, 5:42 p.m.

as mentioned, there is currently  no mechanism to move/copy a project from one ccm repository to another. 


As part of the first task at my new job there was a need to migrate and merge a couple projects from  an old 3.0.1 server to our new production platform on 4.0.4

a coworker and I spent the better part of 2 months creating tools to do this. it is not for the faint of heart. 

my utility copies the project structure, iterations->plans, streams, workspaces and build engines/defintions.
his utility copies all the workitem attachments, links, comments, description and approvals.

we use the standard export/import tools for workitems





sam detweiler commented Mar 12 '14, 8:09 p.m.

and my utility still doesn't do plan views, dashboards, workitem templates, releases, personal queries, custom shared queries,  and I'm sure the list goes on.


Ralph Schoon commented Mar 13 '14, 3:56 a.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER

The development team is well aware of the need, however, as you just described, this is an enormous effort. There are also several different use cases that customers want to be covered, that might need different approaches. To make it worse, a lot of customers have other use cases high on their wishlist.

Having said that, I agree, that this is certainly something that I would like to see being addressed. E.g. with an export format, that allows to do an import. This is probably even harder to do than a programmatic migration using the API and other means available.

Your answer


Register or to post your answer.