Can you integrate RTC 3.0.x to RRC 4.0.x?
One answer
these are the options I am aware of - I would test that in a test environment however.
1. If you have a separate JTS, you can upgrade the JTS to 4.x and register a RRC 4.x to it. This should work, but I have heard of some limitations. Can't remember details.
Please see https://jazz.net/library/article/831 on how you could potentially separate JTS from other applications using a proxy.
2. If you have RTC and JTS on one machine you can't upgrade the JTS alone. The only option would be to set up a separate RRC with a separate JTS. You can make them friends and should be able to link artefacts, but you won't have RRC in the same JTS and suffer reporting and other issues unless going to insight.
I would not go with the 2nd option.You will not be able to get the separate RRC on the common JTS in the future. The 1st option is the best that you can do today.
Comments
thanks for you comments, something to think about, but I'm thinking it's best, less risky and will provide more/better functionality just to upgrade the RTC to 4.0, then add the RRC application and so forth
Scenario 1 in a fully distributed topology is basically what you propose to do, but without having the pressure to upgrade RTC immediately. This is an important use case. But it only works if you have separate deployments for JTS and RTC.
But to upgrade RTC first and then add RRC is a valid approach too.
On item 2: You say JTS / RTC on same machine. Do you really mean same hostname ?
Kevin,
Ralph means the same app server. If 2 CLM applications share the same app server profile, then they must be upgraded together. If they do not share the same app server profile, then they can be upgraded one at a time, with JTS being first.
Well, I really mean if you have installed them into the same location/install folder and deployed in the same App server. This implies the same public URI, to some extent but not mandatory I think.
Using a proxy could still allow to split them in a way that would allow to upgrade JTS independently. See https://jazz.net/library/article/831 where this situation is part of the scenario.
There are too many implications in the scenario to actually create a good answer that would fit into a comment.