RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-18 Thread Kent, Mark 
Thanks everyone for the information!

Mark Kent
Manager, Client Systems Engineering
Technology Support Services
Resources for Information, Technology and Education (RITE)
http://rite.buffalostate.edu<http://rite.buffalostate.edu/>

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 11:00 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Yes, although restoring to a newer version of SQL is supposed to work as well – 
can’t say I’ve tried that though.

Also, the server name has to be the same (just stop the services – ConfigMgr 
and SQL – and rename the old server) and the drive layout on the new server 
should be the same (I think it’s supported to change that now but I wouldn’t 
open that box).

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Mawdsley R.
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 9:14 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Ok that’s interesting.

To confirm then, I would need to build the new infrastructure on Server 
2012/2016 machines, install SQL as the same version it currently is, restore 
the site, then in-place upgrade of SQL?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 07 October 2016 14:17
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Generally, yes. It’s faster and easier and you have an easy fallback method as 
well. Also, you get to test your DR procedures (which I’m sure you’ve tested 
many time before ☺).

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2016 at 3:44 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because that’s how it was configured when I got here! ☺

So you would recommend I setup the new infrastructure and then restore to it, 
instead of a migration then?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 06 October 2016 13:54
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Those would be separate operations just like they are today; neither overly 
difficult either.

Why would you separate your SQL Server though? That’s a [very] bad idea in 
general: 
https://stevethompsonmvp.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/why-you-should-not-use-remote-sql-server-with-configmgr-2012/

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 5:18 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

How does backup and restore hold up if you’re wanting a different configuration 
of Site Servers?

For instance, we currently have SQL and WSUS both on separate boxes from the 
Primary..  when we move to Server 2012/2016 by year end, we want to have these 
locally on the Primary Server instead.

How would it hold up in this scenario?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 05 October 2016 21:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Not true, it’s totally supported.

You can always do housekeeping.

Why migrate anything at all though is the point?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:40 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because backup and restore to a new OS is unsupported. I’ve done a couple of 
them t

RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-07 Thread Jason Sandys 
Yes, although restoring to a newer version of SQL is supposed to work as well – 
can’t say I’ve tried that though.

Also, the server name has to be the same (just stop the services – ConfigMgr 
and SQL – and rename the old server) and the drive layout on the new server 
should be the same (I think it’s supported to change that now but I wouldn’t 
open that box).

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Mawdsley R.
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 9:14 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Ok that’s interesting.

To confirm then, I would need to build the new infrastructure on Server 
2012/2016 machines, install SQL as the same version it currently is, restore 
the site, then in-place upgrade of SQL?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 07 October 2016 14:17
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Generally, yes. It’s faster and easier and you have an easy fallback method as 
well. Also, you get to test your DR procedures (which I’m sure you’ve tested 
many time before ☺).

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2016 at 3:44 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because that’s how it was configured when I got here! ☺

So you would recommend I setup the new infrastructure and then restore to it, 
instead of a migration then?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 06 October 2016 13:54
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Those would be separate operations just like they are today; neither overly 
difficult either.

Why would you separate your SQL Server though? That’s a [very] bad idea in 
general: 
https://stevethompsonmvp.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/why-you-should-not-use-remote-sql-server-with-configmgr-2012/

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 5:18 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

How does backup and restore hold up if you’re wanting a different configuration 
of Site Servers?

For instance, we currently have SQL and WSUS both on separate boxes from the 
Primary..  when we move to Server 2012/2016 by year end, we want to have these 
locally on the Primary Server instead.

How would it hold up in this scenario?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 05 October 2016 21:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Not true, it’s totally supported.

You can always do housekeeping.

Why migrate anything at all though is the point?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:40 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because backup and restore to a new OS is unsupported. I’ve done a couple of 
them this way and it’s really easy. Also presents an opportunity to do some 
housekeeping.

There’s only a very small list of things that can’t be migrated. Some need to 
be done outside of the little wizard but almost everything can be done.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

[Extern

RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-07 Thread Mawdsley R. 
Ok that’s interesting.

To confirm then, I would need to build the new infrastructure on Server 
2012/2016 machines, install SQL as the same version it currently is, restore 
the site, then in-place upgrade of SQL?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 07 October 2016 14:17
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Generally, yes. It’s faster and easier and you have an easy fallback method as 
well. Also, you get to test your DR procedures (which I’m sure you’ve tested 
many time before ☺).

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2016 at 3:44 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because that’s how it was configured when I got here! ☺

So you would recommend I setup the new infrastructure and then restore to it, 
instead of a migration then?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 06 October 2016 13:54
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Those would be separate operations just like they are today; neither overly 
difficult either.

Why would you separate your SQL Server though? That’s a [very] bad idea in 
general: 
https://stevethompsonmvp.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/why-you-should-not-use-remote-sql-server-with-configmgr-2012/

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 5:18 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

How does backup and restore hold up if you’re wanting a different configuration 
of Site Servers?

For instance, we currently have SQL and WSUS both on separate boxes from the 
Primary..  when we move to Server 2012/2016 by year end, we want to have these 
locally on the Primary Server instead.

How would it hold up in this scenario?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 05 October 2016 21:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Not true, it’s totally supported.

You can always do housekeeping.

Why migrate anything at all though is the point?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:40 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because backup and restore to a new OS is unsupported. I’ve done a couple of 
them this way and it’s really easy. Also presents an opportunity to do some 
housekeeping.

There’s only a very small list of things that can’t be migrated. Some need to 
be done outside of the little wizard but almost everything can be done.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

[External Email]
Too much work. Why would you stand up a whole new site, migrate nearly 
everything – not everything can actually be migrated – redeploy all of the 
clients, redeploy content or fight with shared DPs, etc., etc.

A backup and restore can be done easily within a day, tests your DR procedures 
in the process, and doesn’t require you to reconfigure anything.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Spengler, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:18 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject

Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-07 Thread Jason Sandys 
Generally, yes. It’s faster and easier and you have an easy fallback method as 
well. Also, you get to test your DR procedures (which I’m sure you’ve tested 
many time before ☺).

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com" <mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2016 at 3:44 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com" <mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because that’s how it was configured when I got here! ☺

So you would recommend I setup the new infrastructure and then restore to it, 
instead of a migration then?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 06 October 2016 13:54
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Those would be separate operations just like they are today; neither overly 
difficult either.

Why would you separate your SQL Server though? That’s a [very] bad idea in 
general: 
https://stevethompsonmvp.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/why-you-should-not-use-remote-sql-server-with-configmgr-2012/

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 5:18 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

How does backup and restore hold up if you’re wanting a different configuration 
of Site Servers?

For instance, we currently have SQL and WSUS both on separate boxes from the 
Primary..  when we move to Server 2012/2016 by year end, we want to have these 
locally on the Primary Server instead.

How would it hold up in this scenario?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 05 October 2016 21:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Not true, it’s totally supported.

You can always do housekeeping.

Why migrate anything at all though is the point?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:40 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because backup and restore to a new OS is unsupported. I’ve done a couple of 
them this way and it’s really easy. Also presents an opportunity to do some 
housekeeping.

There’s only a very small list of things that can’t be migrated. Some need to 
be done outside of the little wizard but almost everything can be done.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

[External Email]
Too much work. Why would you stand up a whole new site, migrate nearly 
everything – not everything can actually be migrated – redeploy all of the 
clients, redeploy content or fight with shared DPs, etc., etc.

A backup and restore can be done easily within a day, tests your DR procedures 
in the process, and doesn’t require you to reconfigure anything.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Spengler, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:18 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Just curious..why never recommend a migration?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 11:46 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [mssms] RE: Question on migration

First a quick note, if you’re on Server 2012, then you don’t have WSUS 3.

I would never recommend a migration unless you have some external constraint.

Upgrading SQL in-place is almost trivial and works quite well.

Upgrading ConfigMgr in-place works well as well.

If you want to build new, site backup and restore to the new server is the best 
path and i

RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-07 Thread Mawdsley R. 
Because that’s how it was configured when I got here! ☺

So you would recommend I setup the new infrastructure and then restore to it, 
instead of a migration then?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 06 October 2016 13:54
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Those would be separate operations just like they are today; neither overly 
difficult either.

Why would you separate your SQL Server though? That’s a [very] bad idea in 
general: 
https://stevethompsonmvp.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/why-you-should-not-use-remote-sql-server-with-configmgr-2012/

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>> 
on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk<mailto:r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 5:18 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>" 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

How does backup and restore hold up if you’re wanting a different configuration 
of Site Servers?

For instance, we currently have SQL and WSUS both on separate boxes from the 
Primary..  when we move to Server 2012/2016 by year end, we want to have these 
locally on the Primary Server instead.

How would it hold up in this scenario?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 05 October 2016 21:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Not true, it’s totally supported.

You can always do housekeeping.

Why migrate anything at all though is the point?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:40 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because backup and restore to a new OS is unsupported. I’ve done a couple of 
them this way and it’s really easy. Also presents an opportunity to do some 
housekeeping.

There’s only a very small list of things that can’t be migrated. Some need to 
be done outside of the little wizard but almost everything can be done.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

[External Email]
Too much work. Why would you stand up a whole new site, migrate nearly 
everything – not everything can actually be migrated – redeploy all of the 
clients, redeploy content or fight with shared DPs, etc., etc.

A backup and restore can be done easily within a day, tests your DR procedures 
in the process, and doesn’t require you to reconfigure anything.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Spengler, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:18 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Just curious..why never recommend a migration?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 11:46 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [mssms] RE: Question on migration

First a quick note, if you’re on Server 2012, then you don’t have WSUS 3.

I would never recommend a migration unless you have some external constraint.

Upgrading SQL in-place is almost trivial and works quite well.

Upgrading ConfigMgr in-place works well as well.

If you want to build new, site backup and restore to the new server is the best 
path and involves the least disruption. You can perform all of your in-place 
upgrades on the existing server and then backup and restore to the new server 
with like version of everything installed but no remnants of anything old.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kent, Mark
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:45 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] Questio

Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-06 Thread Jason Sandys 
Those would be separate operations just like they are today; neither overly 
difficult either.

Why would you separate your SQL Server though? That’s a [very] bad idea in 
general: 
https://stevethompsonmvp.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/why-you-should-not-use-remote-sql-server-with-configmgr-2012/

J

From: <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> on behalf of "Mawdsley R." 
<r.mawds...@soton.ac.uk>
Reply-To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com" <mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Date: Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 5:18 AM
To: "mssms@lists.myitforum.com" <mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

How does backup and restore hold up if you’re wanting a different configuration 
of Site Servers?

For instance, we currently have SQL and WSUS both on separate boxes from the 
Primary..  when we move to Server 2012/2016 by year end, we want to have these 
locally on the Primary Server instead.

How would it hold up in this scenario?

Rich

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: 05 October 2016 21:41
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Not true, it’s totally supported.

You can always do housekeeping.

Why migrate anything at all though is the point?

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Marcum, John
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:40 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Because backup and restore to a new OS is unsupported. I’ve done a couple of 
them this way and it’s really easy. Also presents an opportunity to do some 
housekeeping.

There’s only a very small list of things that can’t be migrated. Some need to 
be done outside of the little wizard but almost everything can be done.


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

[External Email]
Too much work. Why would you stand up a whole new site, migrate nearly 
everything – not everything can actually be migrated – redeploy all of the 
clients, redeploy content or fight with shared DPs, etc., etc.

A backup and restore can be done easily within a day, tests your DR procedures 
in the process, and doesn’t require you to reconfigure anything.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Spengler, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:18 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Just curious..why never recommend a migration?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 11:46 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [mssms] RE: Question on migration

First a quick note, if you’re on Server 2012, then you don’t have WSUS 3.

I would never recommend a migration unless you have some external constraint.

Upgrading SQL in-place is almost trivial and works quite well.

Upgrading ConfigMgr in-place works well as well.

If you want to build new, site backup and restore to the new server is the best 
path and involves the least disruption. You can perform all of your in-place 
upgrades on the existing server and then backup and restore to the new server 
with like version of everything installed but no remnants of anything old.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kent, Mark
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:45 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] Question on migration

We are currently on SCCM 2012 R2 SP1.  It runs on a Server 2012 (nonR2) server 
with SQL 2012 on box.  We also run WSUS 3 and MDT (latest) on the same box. We 
also have three Server 2012 R2 servers running DP’s (including PXE) and MP’s.

We need to make the move to SCCM CB, for obvious reasons, and I’m wondering 
what the consensus would be on a migration strategy.  Do we attempt to update 
the server to R2, and then update SCCM, and the various pieces (SQL, MDT, etc.) 
after that.  Or is it advisable to build a new 2012 R2 server (2016?) and try 
and migrate over to it?

I’m looking to minimize downtime (who doesn’t).  I’m a little concerned about 
running numerous upgrades, some

RE: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-05 Thread Jim Walker 
Shouldn’t be much of a difference with the CAS. Upgrade CAS then Upgrade 
Primaries.

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Sherry Kissinger
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 1:19 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Then I for one would tell you to stand up a new primary site (with no CAS 
anywhere) with a site code of ASB  (Ah, Sweet Bliss); and migrate everything 
over and break and throw out your cas + primaries.

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 2:37 PM, John Hamilton 
<john.hamil...@ftsi.com<mailto:john.hamil...@ftsi.com>> wrote:
What if you have a CAS?   /duckingforcover

-JHam

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Too much work. Why would you stand up a whole new site, migrate nearly 
everything – not everything can actually be migrated – redeploy all of the 
clients, redeploy content or fight with shared DPs, etc., etc.

A backup and restore can be done easily within a day, tests your DR procedures 
in the process, and doesn’t require you to reconfigure anything.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Spengler, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:18 PM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

Just curious..why never recommend a migration?

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Jason Sandys
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 11:46 AM
To: mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [mssms] RE: Question on migration

First a quick note, if you’re on Server 2012, then you don’t have WSUS 3.

I would never recommend a migration unless you have some external constraint.

Upgrading SQL in-place is almost trivial and works quite well.

Upgrading ConfigMgr in-place works well as well.

If you want to build new, site backup and restore to the new server is the best 
path and involves the least disruption. You can perform all of your in-place 
upgrades on the existing server and then backup and restore to the new server 
with like version of everything installed but no remnants of anything old.

J

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of Kent, Mark
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:45 AM
To: 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>' 
<mssms@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:mssms@lists.myitforum.com>>
Subject: [mssms] Question on migration

We are currently on SCCM 2012 R2 SP1.  It runs on a Server 2012 (nonR2) server 
with SQL 2012 on box.  We also run WSUS 3 and MDT (latest) on the same box. We 
also have three Server 2012 R2 servers running DP’s (including PXE) and MP’s.

We need to make the move to SCCM CB, for obvious reasons, and I’m wondering 
what the consensus would be on a migration strategy.  Do we attempt to update 
the server to R2, and then update SCCM, and the various pieces (SQL, MDT, etc.) 
after that.  Or is it advisable to build a new 2012 R2 server (2016?) and try 
and migrate over to it?

I’m looking to minimize downtime (who doesn’t).  I’m a little concerned about 
running numerous upgrades, sometimes it’s like rolling dice, but if that’s the 
best route I’ll do that.  I’d love to build new if possible, I just don’t know 
how complex that would make the migration and if that would take longer.

I should mentioned our Db had some minor corruption a few times, requiring 
repair with data loss. From what we gathered, it was due to the fact we were 
gathering too much process data which was filling up the Db quite a bit.  Once 
we removed the amount of info that was being gathered from processes, the Db 
size went down and the corruption ended.

Just looking for some pointers from anyone who has done this already, thanks!

Mark Kent
Manager, Client Systems Engineering
Technology Support Services
Resources for Information, Technology and Education (RITE)
http://rite.buffalostate.edu<http://rite.buffalostate.edu/>




-

This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential 
and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended 
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution

Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-05 Thread Sherry Kissinger 
Then I for one would tell you to stand up a new primary site (with no CAS
anywhere) with a site code of ASB  (Ah, Sweet Bliss); and migrate
everything over and break and throw out your cas + primaries.

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 2:37 PM, John Hamilton <john.hamil...@ftsi.com>
wrote:

> What if you have a CAS?   /duckingforcover
>
>
>
> -JHam
>
>
>
> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.
> myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason Sandys
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:02 PM
> *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com
> *Subject:* [mssms] RE: Question on migration
>
>
>
> Too much work. Why would you stand up a whole new site, migrate nearly
> everything – not everything can actually be migrated – redeploy all of the
> clients, redeploy content or fight with shared DPs, etc., etc.
>
>
>
> A backup and restore can be done easily within a day, tests your DR
> procedures in the process, and doesn’t require you to reconfigure anything.
>
>
>
> J
>
>
>
> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.
> myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Spengler, Jeff
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:18 PM
> *To:* 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' <mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
> *Subject:* [mssms] RE: Question on migration
>
>
>
> Just curious..why never recommend a migration?
>
>
>
> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.
> myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On Behalf Of *Jason
> Sandys
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 05, 2016 11:46 AM
> *To:* mssms@lists.myitforum.com
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [mssms] RE: Question on migration
>
>
>
> First a quick note, if you’re on Server 2012, then you don’t have WSUS 3.
>
>
>
> I would never recommend a migration unless you have some external
> constraint.
>
>
>
> Upgrading SQL in-place is almost trivial and works quite well.
>
>
>
> Upgrading ConfigMgr in-place works well as well.
>
>
>
> If you want to build new, site backup and restore to the new server is the
> best path and involves the least disruption. You can perform all of your
> in-place upgrades on the existing server and then backup and restore to the
> new server with like version of everything installed but no remnants of
> anything old.
>
>
>
> J
>
>
>
> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.
> myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] *On Behalf Of *Kent, Mark
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:45 AM
> *To:* 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' <mssms@lists.myitforum.com>
> *Subject:* [mssms] Question on migration
>
>
>
> We are currently on SCCM 2012 R2 SP1.  It runs on a Server 2012 (nonR2)
> server with SQL 2012 on box.  We also run WSUS 3 and MDT (latest) on the
> same box. We also have three Server 2012 R2 servers running DP’s (including
> PXE) and MP’s.
>
>
>
> We need to make the move to SCCM CB, for obvious reasons, and I’m
> wondering what the consensus would be on a migration strategy.  Do we
> attempt to update the server to R2, and then update SCCM, and the various
> pieces (SQL, MDT, etc.) after that.  Or is it advisable to build a new 2012
> R2 server (2016?) and try and migrate over to it?
>
>
>
> I’m looking to minimize downtime (who doesn’t).  I’m a little concerned
> about running numerous upgrades, sometimes it’s like rolling dice, but if
> that’s the best route I’ll do that.  I’d love to build new if possible, I
> just don’t know how complex that would make the migration and if that would
> take longer.
>
>
>
> I should mentioned our Db had some minor corruption a few times, requiring
> repair with data loss. From what we gathered, it was due to the fact we
> were gathering too much process data which was filling up the Db quite a
> bit.  Once we removed the amount of info that was being gathered from
> processes, the Db size went down and the corruption ended.
>
>
>
> Just looking for some pointers from anyone who has done this already,
> thanks!
>
>
>
> Mark Kent
>
> Manager, Client Systems Engineering
>
> Technology Support Services
>
> Resources for Information, Technology and Education (RITE)
>
> http://rite.buffalostate.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
>
> [image: Image removed by sender. Idaho Power Legal Disclaimer]
>
> This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential
> and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
> distribution, or use of the information c

Re: [mssms] RE: Question on migration

2016-10-05 Thread Sherry Kissinger 
I was just about to write something similar to Jason.  Upgrade the OS
(patch it up, reboots in between everywhere you think you need them) and
wait a few days making sure everything is good.  Upgrade SQL to the latest
Supported version for CM12 R2 SP1.  Again, wait a day or two (don't need
that much baking time for the SQL upgrade, it's pretty boring really).
Upgrade CM to Current Branch.

For paranoia, I personally wouldn't want to (all in 1 night or 1 weekend)
do all three--if there's something "interesting" that happens after you
update all 3 things quickly it might be hard to figure out which 1 of the
three updates were the cause.

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Jason Sandys  wrote:

> First a quick note, if you’re on Server 2012, then you don’t have WSUS 3.
>
>
>
> I would never recommend a migration unless you have some external
> constraint.
>
>
>
> Upgrading SQL in-place is almost trivial and works quite well.
>
>
>
> Upgrading ConfigMgr in-place works well as well.
>
>
>
> If you want to build new, site backup and restore to the new server is the
> best path and involves the least disruption. You can perform all of your
> in-place upgrades on the existing server and then backup and restore to the
> new server with like version of everything installed but no remnants of
> anything old.
>
>
>
> J
>
>
>
> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsadmin@lists.
> myitforum.com] *On Behalf Of *Kent, Mark
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 11:45 AM
> *To:* 'mssms@lists.myitforum.com' 
> *Subject:* [mssms] Question on migration
>
>
>
> We are currently on SCCM 2012 R2 SP1.  It runs on a Server 2012 (nonR2)
> server with SQL 2012 on box.  We also run WSUS 3 and MDT (latest) on the
> same box. We also have three Server 2012 R2 servers running DP’s (including
> PXE) and MP’s.
>
>
>
> We need to make the move to SCCM CB, for obvious reasons, and I’m
> wondering what the consensus would be on a migration strategy.  Do we
> attempt to update the server to R2, and then update SCCM, and the various
> pieces (SQL, MDT, etc.) after that.  Or is it advisable to build a new 2012
> R2 server (2016?) and try and migrate over to it?
>
>
>
> I’m looking to minimize downtime (who doesn’t).  I’m a little concerned
> about running numerous upgrades, sometimes it’s like rolling dice, but if
> that’s the best route I’ll do that.  I’d love to build new if possible, I
> just don’t know how complex that would make the migration and if that would
> take longer.
>
>
>
> I should mentioned our Db had some minor corruption a few times, requiring
> repair with data loss. From what we gathered, it was due to the fact we
> were gathering too much process data which was filling up the Db quite a
> bit.  Once we removed the amount of info that was being gathered from
> processes, the Db size went down and the corruption ended.
>
>
>
> Just looking for some pointers from anyone who has done this already,
> thanks!
>
>
>
> Mark Kent
>
> Manager, Client Systems Engineering
>
> Technology Support Services
>
> Resources for Information, Technology and Education (RITE)
>
> http://rite.buffalostate.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Thank you,

Sherry Kissinger

My Parameters:  Standardize. Simplify. Automate
Blogs: http://www.mofmaster.com, http://mnscug.org/blogs/sherry-kissinger,
http://www.smguru.org