Not just +1 but +1000. At least in Daniel's case they had 100,000+ managed systems. Having a CAS and 5!!!!! Primary sites for 7,000 managed systems is sheer lunacy.
J From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Ratliff Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 6:48 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [mssms] RE: ConfigMgr 2012 SP1 -> CB Get rid of the CAS, no question. We just migrated off 2012 R2 CU3 to 1602 (now running 1610) and its fantastic. Collections are faster, OSD is faster, console is faster. Would never go back. Daniel Ratliff From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Douglas, Aaron Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 4:43 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [mssms] ConfigMgr 2012 SP1 -> CB Hello everyone, I am after a bit of design guidance regarding moving from 2012 SP1 to Current Branch and whether a migration or upgrade is the best way to go. I realise there are many factors that affect design decisions but if I present the key facts I am hoping to get a push in the best (practice) direction. We currently have around 7000 Clients, these are split over the following hierarchy (not my design); 1 x CAS 5 x Primary Sites - Just Site Server no other site system servers. Each server is currently Server 2008 R2. The 5 Primaries Site Servers are at 5 physical locations (2 of which are DR sites), I assume this design decision was made in thinking that this offered redundancy and availability in emergency situations etc. In terms of client Operating System's we do still have 2003 and XP in use although projects are in motion to replace. This is our only hierarchy, as in we do not have a Test/Dev environment based Hierarchy upon which to test the upgrade. So now to my quandary - There are those that want to do an upgrade of the existing hierarchy, this would include building a test hierarchy based on the production one which would surely mean mirroring the CAS and primaries in the test environment to provide the ability to test any upgrade properly. Due to the factors involved I think my preference however would be to take this opportunity to simplify our hierarchy and build an new Single Primary with MPs/DPs etc in the physical locations and do a phased migration over. To my mind this brings many more benefits, we can have a proper test hierarchy built up at the right point in the process, the existing infra can support the older clients still, we can move the Server Operating system to a supported level. What do you guys think? Thanks in anticipation Aaron Douglas This email is intended for the person or company named and access by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the person or company named, please delete this email and notify the sender. The information in this email, including any attachments, may be confidential or legally privileged (meaning that its disclosure is protected in law). Its unauthorised disclosure, copying, distribution or use is prohibited and may be unlawful. Email communications sent over the internet are not guaranteed to be secure or virus-free and such messages are potentially at risk. The Royal London Group accepts no liability for any claims arising from use of the internet to transmit messages by or to any company within the Royal London Group. The Royal London Group consists of The Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Limited and its subsidiaries. The Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Limited is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority and provides life assurance and pensions. Registered in England and Wales number 99064. Registered office: 55 Gracechurch Street, London, EC3V 0RL. In the Republic of Ireland: The Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Limited is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority in the UK and is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland for conduct of business rules. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.
