Just going through a 'live' migration from CC3 to CC4 at one of the Primary schools I cover. There have been a few issues with the upgrade of the existing systems, mainly drivers, and some software incompatabilities (DigiBlue!!!). Once we have it all tied down and running I will give you the full SP regarding the issues/workarounds etc..
BTW - RM quoted 1 day to do the whole upgrade job.. We are halfway through day 3 and still not done...
Was that 1 day to do just the servers or whole site? & same question for the 3 days?
Originally Posted by Thesweeney
Whole site.. Both their 1 day quote and the 3 day actual..
1 server and 55 workstations...
Point to remember people going through cc3 to cc4 at moment will have longer times as still few manual processes that once final install is released will be automated not done by engineer.
Also big thing is how many packages you have that is the bit that takes longest etc
Ditto! But what's this about the 50% discount for being RM certified? I'm a certified NM and my technician is a certified technician but we pay the full whack for our support contracts AFAIK.
Originally Posted by -Chris-
i would assume they are atss technician and that is where discount comes in..
Ah right. I was getting excited for a moment.
Originally Posted by russdev
Would be nice if they gave some incentives for those of us who are certified tbough.
Well.. The migration to CC4 is done.. RM said 1 day start to finish, actually took the best part of 4!!! Must admit it does look nice and the new RMMC is better to use that the CC3 version.. Some of the points raised during the upgrade are below, hope these help those heading down the CC4 route, or make you think again!!
1. New RM supplied server hardware had chipset driver compatibility issues during server migration, causing re-imaging to fail. **Cost a good half day whilst RM tech was trying to rectify**
2. NIC driver rollback was required on the server to overcome failures on all client systems during build process. This failure is caused by the NIC driver on the server being ‘too recent’. **Cost 3-4 hours of build/re-build time whilst trying to figure this one out**
3. Workstation builds can only be done by bootable CD, but has just been released by RM on their support site, of the ability to make a bootable USB pen drive for systems that have no optical drive.
4. Legacy systems with low amounts of RAM (256Mb and under) require a ‘low-RAM’ boot CD, which seemingly needs to be left in for practically the entire build process.
5. NIC drivers need to be added to the boot images prior to burning, they do not come already in the image. **Not initially known by RM tech, cost 2 hours build time and several CD-R’s**
6. Boot CDs are site specific, so if you have multiple sites all going CC4 then you can’t use the one ‘master’ disc for all sites.
7. Workstation builds taking in excess of 6-7 hours from start to finish, due in part to the number of packages that were needing to be installed (in this case IRO 120, including hotfixes etc.).
8. Build was hanging for approx 2 hours+ on the systems attempt to install DigitalBlue movie software, which, it was later found out, is not compatible with CC4 in its current build configuration. **Again not known by RM tech until had spoken with other techs doing same upgrades at other sites.**
9. Workstations are re-booting themselves when a user logs back on after locking the system. RM is aware of this and working on a fix.
All in all, it probably is not all that bad, but as I said it took 2 of us the best part of 4 days to upgrade a site of 1 server and 55 workstations!! I really would not like to go through this on a large site..
@Thesweeney: you running XP or Vista clients?
XP. The legacy systems are no where near beefy enough to take Vista (192Mb RAM, and they are only 2 yr old RM Ones!!!)
Originally Posted by webman
Got to see CC4 at a conference yesterday, i'm not an RM fan, but i have seen CC3, and CC4 looked like a big improvment, felt to me what CC3 should have been, the managment console looked so much better than the rubbish one in CC3 because it was an actual application, not a web based app.
I see :)
I will admit I'm a little concerned over the 6hr build time - could you give us some more info please on what sort/spec of machines these are, the network infrastrucutre, how many machines you were building at once etc?
CC3 Build time on our latest computers is about 1.5hrs with usual software packages - Office, SIMS, ACTIVstudio etc.
The spec of the systems seemingly had no effect on the build time, took the same on brand new Sempron 2000+ with 1Gb ram as it did on the legacy systems (1.8G P4 256Mb ram/2.8G Celeron 192Mb ram).
Network is switched 100base, and we probably had only about 10 systems max building at any one time. From chatting with the RM tech that was down with us there, some other sites have been having the same timescales when building CC4 systems..
1) Well that is why you are a field trial site to pick issues like that up.
Originally Posted by Thesweeney
2) NIC drivers issues see those on non rm networks as well.. ;)
3) Been well documented that cc4 build disks would not use floppys.
4) Arr you not got all drivers installed yet package due to be rolled out soon that adds all drivers to your server (like a final release will have) should of been mentioned in the pre field trial emails well was said to me.
5) some good logical reasons behind one is that as it helps remove need for hardware packs.
6) I would guess this will be fixed in final release..
7) Doesn't take as long as that well not for us..
8) Well digiblue works on no computer rm or not ;)
9) Yes known issue
Took use two days two servers....
As said in previous post lot of what your engineer did will be made part of automatic package but in field trials they keep separate till near end so they can pick up issues and solve them easier.
All noted, but there has never been any mention of the site being used for/as a field trial. As far as myself, the head and in house ICT co-ord were aware it was a live roll out, been all the way through the documentation/e-mail and everything.
Have they not been doing these field trials for a couple of months now?? Surely the RM tech would have been aware, or at least made aware, before coming onsite to do this upgrade of the issues that appear to happen cross-site.. My point being that we probably wasted a good day and a half on trying to resolve what should have been known issues to him..
Your point 8 - Yes I know.. Has anyone ever managed to get it to work properly;)
Point 9 - OK so it is a known issue. How long have they known about it? With you knowing would indicate that RM have known for a while, and given that they are rolling this out in a live teaching environment where it has the ability to seriously disrupt the learning experience for the little people, surely they should be working on a resolution on the hurry up..
Sorry if it is sounding like I am having a bit of a rant here....
Deep breath...and relax...