Release of SharePoint 2010 provides PerformancePoint as the Service Application for the SharePoint platform with the following new features:
- PPS object storage in SharePoint lists and libraries
- Filters as objects that can be shared across dashboards
- Calculated KPIs, which enable you to perform calculations from several different data sources
- Dynamic hierarchy support, which updates a hierarchy when the data source is updated
- Multiple KPI actuals
- Hierarchies as connection points in the filter framework
- Variance between actual and target values displayed on a scorecard
- Empty-row filtering
- KPIs natively on columns
- Scorecard drill-down
- Toolbar sorting and filtering redesign
- KPI details report
- Native support for the decomposition tree
- Pie charts
- SQL Server Analysis Services Conditional Formatting in Analytic Reports
However, a few features, that existed in PerformancePoint 2007, have been removed, such as:
- Dashboard previews
- OLAP Data Sources
- OWC (Office Web Components), which include Pivot Tables and Pivot Charts
- ODBC (Open Database Connectivity) data source connection
- Trend analysis report
Source: “Microsoft SharePoint 2010 PerformancePoint Services Unleashed”
In one of my recent SharePoint project I tried to map client’s requirements to SharePoint 2010 features, and I found series of articles on Rez's SharePoint Blog quite useful. Author describes the major features of Records and IM in SharePoint 2010 with a few samples.
Here, I publish links on author’s posts with the summary of features for each category:
- Document IDs (can generate custom ID format)
- Managed Metadata Service | Term Store (managed terms and enterprise keywords, linked to lists)
- In-Place Records Declarations (policies for content types and libraries; no dependency on Record Centre; wiki pages, blog posts, article pages are the records)
- Site Collection Auditing
- Content Organizer (Routing Rules from SharePoint 2007 are now replaced by content organizer; rules priorities; subfolders creation; email routing)
- Hold and eDiscovery
- Content Type Publishing Hubs (central location to manage and publish content types)
- Retention (inheritance)
- Virtual folders and metadata based navigation (subfolders inherit metadata; Virtual folder can replace views)
- can’t modify document content after record has been created
- no item-level security on records
Microsoft released the governance planning for SharePoint 2010 recently. The detailed information is published there http://blogs.technet.com/b/tothesharepoint/archive/2010/09/01/new-governance-content-white-papers-and-check-out-the-model.aspx
The sample template for Governance Planning outlining is the following
SECTION 1: General Governance Guidelines
- Governance Plan Objective
- Vision Statement
- General Guidelines
- Roles and Responsibilities
- Guiding Principles
SECTION 2: Detailed Governance Policies and Standards
- Content Management Policies and Standards
Design Policies and Standards
- Posting Content to Existing Pages or Sites
- Posting Content to the Home Page
- Posting Content to Personal Pages
- Social Tags and Ratings
- Records Retention
- Content Auditing and Review
Customization Policies and Standards
- Creating New Subsites
- Page Layout and Organization
- Content Types and Metadata
- Content-Specific Guidelines/Policies
- Browser-based updates
- Updates based on SharePoint Designer
- Sandboxed Solutions
- Centrally-deployed / 3rd Party Solutions
This post explains what type licences are required for the SharePoint Server farm and how to choose the right license.
SharePoint Server Licences
1. Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 for Internet sites (FIS)
This licence model is for internet-faces sites that can be accessed by :
o external users (suppliers, customers, vendors, student, and the public)*
o both anonymous and authenticated users
o Internal users, only if all content, information, and applications are also accessible to external users **
* Server and CAL licensing is not required for people who use SharePoint only to author information
** If the server has items that are for internal use only, those users require CALs, and their servers require licenses for SharePoint Server.
"Intranet sites" licence can be used for both internal and remote employees with the appropriate number of CALs, even though intranet sites might be exposed to the Internet to allow access to remote employees,
SharePoint Server for Internet Sites must be licensed on all servers (staging, application, index, front-end) that provide content to external users.
This license has all the features of the Enterprise Edition of Office SharePoint Server. This is a per server license that does not require the purchase of Client Access Licenses.
2. Client Access Licence (CAL)
Required for MOSS/SharePoint Server 2010 for every employee contributing to or accessing site internally
SharePoint Server requires Microsoft Windows Server and Microsoft SQL Server and does not include licenses for those products
1. Windows Licences
o External Connector Licence
This is Windows Server licence that is required to allow your external users ( business partners, customers , students) to access your network.
External Connector licenses should be acquired for each Windows server that the external user is accessing (not just for the server to which they are authenticating), regardless if it's SQL Server, Index server or file server, because their data is accessed over the Internet.
Pricing: $1999 USD per server, and $7999 with Remote Access
Additional Sources: http://www.iqt.com.au/selectnewsletters/currentissue/pdf/WindowsExternal.pdf
o Client Access Licence
Device-based CAL (Device CAL) is required for every device that accesses a SharePoint Server, regardless of the number of people who use that device
User CAL, a CAL is required for every person who accesses a SharePoint Server, regardless of the number of devices used.
Whatever option is chosen, all CALs must be the same type.
2. SQL Server licences
For the "Active-Passive" cluster the processors' licenses for Active Node only are required. Thus, for the 4 servers SQL Cluster only 2 licences are required.
Current calculation is performed for the following scenario, with 3 Servers
“Public facing Web Site which is used by anonymous read only visitors, plus those whom may register to be sent regular email, participate in a community or book airline tickets. These machines will not be used for content contribution, a.k.a. content authoring and approval. These boxes are purely for servicing Internet users”
Price is indicative only
MOSS (2xWFE, 1xIndex)
MOSS 2007 FIS
Windows External Connector
Windows 2003 R2 Standard
SQL (2 node cluster, 2x CPU each)
SQL Server 2005 Standard CPU
Windows External Connector
Windows 2003 R2 Standard
Code development and testing
Use an MSDN license
Use the server license with the appropriate number of CALs
Staging environments are typically configured to match the production environment. Consequently, use the Internet sites license.
Official documentation explained licencing can be found there
In this post I’d like to provide the quick overview of what is the Taxonomy
Taxonomy is a categorization framework agreed upon by business and content owners (with the help of subject matter experts)that will be used to tag content.
As an Information Architect building the taxonomy is an important activity of your role. Taxonomy affects the information enterprise-wide in the following areas: Navigation, Content Management, Search, Tagging. Taxonomy can be represented by following types: flat, hierarchical, faced, network, functional, subject-oriented
When you create your Taxonomy project plan consider the following steps:
- quality metrics
- content analysis
- metadata specification
- vocabulary development (+ thesaurus)
- semantic network
- cost benefit analysis model
- About 10 discrete divisions (called facets)
- 4-6 levels deep.
- Up to 15 terms at each level.
Got good news today - I just have been re-awarded as SharePoint MVP again! Hurray!!!
It's my 6th year of holding this status (4 years as .NET/C# and 2 yeas as SharePoint MVP). I’m really happy that my passion about technology and influence to others is still recognized by community. Promising to keep this pace for the next years as well.
And additional announcement, recently I became un-official Tech Reviewer of PacktPub Publisher (http://www.packtpub.com/) reviewing the forthcoming SharePoint books.
This year is quite tough for me, in terms of presentations. It’s the 5th event which I attend as the speaker, and now it’s the the Australian SharePoint Event of the year – about 60 speakers and 1000 delegates. This will ROCK!
“After a very successful New Zealand SharePoint conference in 2009, this year sees the conference extended to include Australia! This will be THE Australian SharePoint Conference to learn about both SharePoint 2007 and SharePoint 2010. Expert local and international speakers will present on topics that will help you understand and succeed with your SharePoint implementations, and add real world value to your organisation and businesses.”
I have two sessions:
- “Real World Business problems with PerformancePoint Services in SharePoint 2010” about Balance Scorecards
- Vendor’s session about the SharePoint 2010 success stories
In these days, I’m working on the several SharePoint projects where we utilize Silverlight for the better user experience. The decision was driven by the specific requirements and not by “taste to try something new” . In one project, we are using Silverlight to build Dashboard, in another, we are using SharePoint Foundation 2010 (SPF) for public internet site, and we need to provide customers the forms to input request tickets. That second project became quite challenging for us in terms of providing custom forms in short period of time.
The problems with SPF 2010 with forms design is that SPF 2010 doesn’t support InfoPath – the simplest and fast way to provide the custom user-input form in SharePoint. We researched different alternatives, as hosting InfoPath in ASPX pages, developing XSLT forms, or ASPX layout pages, but all of them were either too complex or didn’t meet the requirements to integrate with external Web Services and Database easily. The only one solution which could provide quick and nice UI + simplified integration with Web Services is Silverlight. So, that’s where our story begins :)
Despite of native Silverlight support in SharePoint 2010 there are a lot of hidden issues how to develop, debug and test SL. In this post I will share the challenges I experienced with Silverlight in SharePoint 2010 and solutions to help others to cut the corners.
With SharePoint 2010 you can use Silverlight 3.5 or Silverlight 4.0. We had no dependency on .NET Framework version so picked the decent 4.0 version. You need to install Silverlight 4.0 Tools, SDL, WCF
When you create a new Silverlight project you will be asked if you want to host it in the external Web Application. In all articles I read they recommend not to host in external webApp and build and deploy directly to SharePoint via Features . It’s up to you if you choose that way, but for me deploying to SharePoint and testing form there is very annoying and time consuming process (it builds WSP, deploys WSP, resets IIS, SharePoint page recompiles), so I prefer to develop and deploy to the simple aspx page (TypeMock rocks in this case) and then deploy to SharePoint when necessary. The development is much faster in this case.
2) Web Services
Silverlight has limited support of SOAP services, so, consider using WCF Services, due to better support of serialized types.
SharePoint Silverlight debugging in Visual Studio is not supported by default, due to Script debugging settings turned on. It means that you can’t set breakpoints and step into your code in VS if you are not deploying Silverlight controls via feature. Such functionality is supported when you host your SL project in external Web Project (another reason not to host in SharePoint during development)
To provide the SharePoint SL debugging capabilities you need to package your .XAP file in SharePoint Project (in VS) and deploy as a Feature. Such approach allows to enable “Siverlight Debugging” instead of client one, and step into your .cs code from Visual Studio 2010. This options is set from the VS IDE. Navigate to the SharePoint project properties –> SharePoint Tab –> click “Enable Silverlight Debugging”. That checkbox will activate the Remote Debugger and you will be able to debug SL hosted in SharePoint using Visual Studio 2010 (but you need to configure the Remote Debugger first, opening the firewall ports. On the 64bit windows you need to configure the x86 version of msvsmon.exe because the Visual Studio is x86)
I found really strange behaviour that debugging doesn’t work if you don’t have another instance of the the SL page opened in browser. Seems there is a bug resolving assemblies, because when you start debugging your solution might be re-builded , IIS restarts, thus remote debugger can’t attach to the right assemblies. To fix it just open another tab in browser, navigate to page with SL control you are debugging and only after that start debugging which will open the second instance of that page.
You can deploy your Silverlight controls (XAP files) either externally or in SharePoint. Refer to this step-by-step instruction. Take into account that if you host Web Service outside Silverlight you need to supply ClientAccessPolicy.xml and crossdomain.xml for the cross-domain calls. Create and put these files into the root folder of SharePoint (\inetpub\wwwroot\wss\VirtualDirectories\<your app port>) or into the root of the external hosing(depending the way you host SL and services)
To deploy the XAP files to SharePoint they recommend to use the following locations: SharePoint Library, “_catalogs/masterpage/”, “_layouts” or custom locations. I found that the standard SharePoint 2010 controls are stored into the “_layouts/clientbin/” folder. This folder is designed to be a standard place for hosting assemblies that are used in Silverlight. Take into account that all files deployed to SharePoint are ghostable (even you don’t specify the type), and you won’t see them on physical drive - use the SharePoint Designer to check the the file presence in the folder you deployed it.
Few words about storing the XAP in Lists. It’s might be appropriate in some scenarios, but I found that the default deployment doesn’t render the deployed file in the list :) Yep it’s true, your list will be empty, nothing there, but if you type the complete URL to the file in the browser you will be prompted to download it. It looks like that the file has been actually deployed, but not exposed via the List (albeit list is created and rendered)
Web Services deployment is very easy, because Visual Studio can create the deployment package for you (right mouse click on the WCF project and select “Package”). VS will archive the solution and create the CMD script to deploy the solution to IIS. I would recommend to make additional step further and to use Web Deploy for this
That’s all for what I found to be tricky in developing Silverlight controls for the SharePoint 2010. Will update this post with further findings. If you have something to add or to share on this topic please add comments below.
Have you ever tried to calculate how much your daily paperwork routine costs you?!
- It costs $20 to file a document, $120 to find a misfiled document, and $220 to reproduce a lost document.
- 7.5 percent of all documents get lost; 3 percent of the remainder get misfiled.
- The average document is photocopied 19 times.
- Professionals spend 5-15% of their time reading information, but up to 50% of their time looking for the right information.
- $1 per document to store, $5 per document to retrieve
Reading the “8 Factors to Consider in Creating an Information Management Strategy eBook and Presentations” found a few interesting data points to consider:
- If the U.S. cut its office paper use by roughly 10 percent or 540,000 tons, greenhouse gas emissions
would fall by 1.6 million tons — equivalent to taking 280,000 cars off the road for a year.
- There are over 4 trillion paper documents in the U.S., growing at a rate of 22% per year.
- For 56% of organizations, the volume of paper records is increasing.
- The average office worker uses 10,000 sheets of copy paper each year and wastes about 1,410 of these pages.
- With the average cost of each wasted page being about six cents, a company with 500 employees
could be spending $42,000 per year on wasted prints.
That can be a good justification of moving to eForms
In my career I have a few years of experience in Finance and Trading industry and recently I decided to look back at that industry again and define the new goals in my career :). In these days, in spare time, I’m working on the trading “pet project” and came out with one interesting conception of finance modelling and prediction (an algorithm actually) that I’m seriously considering to patent.
The patenting was quite new for me, especially what relates to patenting of the algorithms :), and after a few weeks of investigation I’ve found out the following stuff that I reckon will be interesting for everybody.
An algorithm must possess five essential features – definition, finiteness, input/ output, effectiveness and order
- The feature of definition relates to the certainty of description of an algorithm’s steps
- The feature of finiteness relates to the need for an algorithm to specify a route to a final step in all possible cases to be handled by it
- The need for an algorithm to have input and output follows from the fact that it is designed to be useful.
- An algorithm is said to be effective when if each of the steps are simple enough to be performed manually, even if such performance would be tedious and inefficient
- An algorithm would be less than serviceable if its steps were described in no particular order, even if an experienced operator could work out the correct sequence for him or herself.
2) Process of Patenting – WHAT
Before patenting you need to find if the similar patent already exists. There is a patent database that allows to search across all existing patents http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/search/index.jsp. The goal of this step is to find if your patent already exists, and if not –what’s the most related one
3) Process of Patenting - HOW
I hope that I will have enough time to finish my algorithm this year (after I learn this bloody MatLab) and apply for the provisional patent.
Last few month I’m playing with how FAST Search is working and found interesting information about the problems in searching the right information.
Studies estimate we spend 10%-15% of out time to search necessary information (what correlates to another research that employees spend 50mins per working day to find information)
The relevance of the search consist from 3 parts: recall, precision and ranking
The “catch-22” situation of the search is in “Precision vs recall” battle. High precision means that the exact document found, when high recall means that no document are missed. In other words “recall” measure how well system finds your items, when “precision” filters our what you don’t want. Precision and recall can be calculated by result set.
Thus, returning more documents (encreasing recall) we loose the precision and vice versa. The choice in up to you.
Recently found a checklist for the SharePoint Farm design template I described previously , which I reckon quite good to be used across my projects
- An infrastructure design to support your solution
- A detailed document that describes how you will implement the solution
- A plan for testing and validating the solution
- A site and solution architecture
- An understanding of the monitoring and sustained engineering requirements to support the solution
- A record of how the solution will be governed
- An understanding of how the solution will be messaged to the consumer to drive adoption of the solution
In these days I’m working on how Information Architecture is designed for the Dashboard/Scorecards solutions – what information artefacts are used and how they are organized. While skimmed different resources on this topic I found one interesting statement by David Parmenter, in his book “Key Performance Indicators:Developing,Implementing,and Using Winning KPIs” that I reckon is worth to share
David uses 12 steps for identifying the artefacts that are used as Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for Scorecard/Dashboard. Process covers major success BUSINESS DRIVEN factors, such as stakeholder buy-in, organic growth, and iteration instead of “get it right the first time.”
1. Senior management team commitment
2. Establishing a “winning KPI” project team
3. Establishing a “just do it” culture and process
4. Setting up a holistic KPI development strategy
5. Marketing a KPI system to all employees
6. Identifying organization-wide critical success factors
7. Recording performance measures in a database
8. Selecting team-level performance measures
9. Selecting organizational winning KPIs
10. Developing the reporting frameworks at all levels
11. Facilitating the use of winning KPIs
12. Refining KPIs to maintain their relevance
The most common mistake when people select the irrelevant KPIs that don’t following the strategy maps. Strategy maps are designed to link a company’s high-level goals to the KPIs that measure how the company is performing on the measures that drive the business. In case of KPI not matching the business you are tracking the irrelevant stuff
I published several posts regarding document templates for the SharePoint projects previously, but they were related to the specific sections of the projects.
Recently I had discussion with colleagues about the structure of “Solution Design” document and logical inconsistency we have seen all time.
Almost each project you are starting should be based on the “Solution Design” that describes and justifies what is going to be implemented. I've seen tons of documents for C++, and .NET projects in the Financing, Marketing, Industrial and others areas, that were organized quite good logically. By “quite good” I mean that you structure the document from the broad and general terms, introducing what do we have, moving toward the specialization and physical artefacts. In two words it should be “out-in” approach.
SharePoint brings a lot of new conceptions and artefacts that either don’t exist or are not taken into account for the Solution Design that came from other areas. For example, “content types”, “capacity planning”, “farm architecture”. Reviewing several “Solution Design” documents for SharePoint projects last 6 months I saw a lot of inconsistency of how information is addressed and structured – people mess up the physical artefacts with logical ones, structure flows without any logic and smooth transitions. For example, in section of “Solution architecture” they put together logical design and network infrastructure. It’s ok for a Web application where all servers have almost the same role, but in SharePoint the logical and physical design are two different things and they don’t match each other 1-to-1. Logical designs is based on metadata and taxonomies, when physical design is dictated by “usage patterns” and data volumes. You will have absolutely two different physical designs creating system for enterprise to manage documents online and for the digital agency with the terabytes of media files – conceptually you have the same metadata but physical organization will be different due to usage approach.
I have some thought for a while about creating the “SharePoint Solution Design” template that is properly aligned - starting from the broad terms, which describe what the system is about, specializing the taxonomies and content prior to the physical organization. Such document should aim to targets:
- Lead the reader logically to the physical design, describing what artefacts the system manipulates and how they are used. So, when we come to the physical organization the reader will have their own vision of system in mind.
- No hops between unrelated sections (like logical and physical architecture), because physical design should be justified previously.
After more that hour of analysis, brainstorming a discussion we came out with the following structure that I want to publish here and hear your feedbacks.
Update 1 (Feb 12, 2009): added the section about “Information Artefacts”. This is important to understand what are the information that system uses, ignoring the technology aspect. Is it about managind the word documents and having multilevel approval, or is it the financial company who creates the dashboard for the stock marker. This is important to be described earlier to have understanding about usage patterns, because it will affect the Information Architecture.
- Document Purpose
- INFORMATION ARTEFACTS
- Artefacts overview (the list of information pieces the system operates)
- Data Flow (how data is moving across the system0
- Usage cases (different scenarios of using information artefacts)
- Artefacts Managing (describing how different products – sharepoint, drupal and others) can manage artefactts)
- INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE
- Site Structure
- Site Maps
- User Interface and Branding
- Content Types, Columns and Lists
- Content Types
- LOGICAL ARCHITECTURE
- Feature Mapping (which features of the SharePoint are gonna be used and for which purposes)
- Farm Logical Architecture
- Web Applications
- Managed Paths
- Site Collections and Content Databases
- Shared Services
- User Profile and Properties
- Service Accounts
- CAPACITY PLANNING
- PHYSICAL ARCHITECTURE
- Server Topology
- Network Infrastructure
- Storage Requirements
- Web Front-End Servers
- Application Server
- SQL Server
Yesterday I was working on the custom error handing for the SharePoint. They wanted to provide the consistent look and feel for all errors that you can expect – from 301 to 500. It’s quite simple task and what you just need is to turn off custom errors in web.config and set customized error pages in IIS.
The reason we customized error pages via IIS is that we didn’t want to mess up with customization of OOTB pages, and our pages have several pictures. Rendering pictures for “unauthorized” and “forbidden” errors under SharePoint in problematic. That’s why we just redirect user to another site with custom error pages.
The only issue we experienced is customizing 403 page, when SharePoint handled it gracefully redirecting us to \_layouts\AccessDenied.aspx page. To avoid such behavior I end up with URL parsing and status code analysis via custom HTTPModule.
I published this solution as SharePoint feature on the CodePlex site http://sharepoint403page.codeplex.com/
You probably will be very surprised to know that SharePoint 2007 doesn’t manage web.config via direct access to the actual file. The reason for this is that updating the web.config directly may not always work (you don’t have permissions, or file is locked, or context is not ready yet and etc) and you need a way to propagate all your changes to WFE web.configs.
So, what SharePoint does is manage web.Config via …. Content DB. Yep, right via Content DB, it’s not a joke :) The actual records of web.config are stored in [SharePoint_Config].[dbo].[Objects] as XML entries. You can query them easily via the following script
SELECT Id, ClassId, ParentId, Name, Status, Version, Properties
WHERE (Name LIKE '%WebConfig%')
To modify web.config programmatically you need to use SPWebConfigModification - it updates columns in the Object table with your values and SharePoint modify web.config itself across all servers. Unfortunately, this method is really poor documented, so you need to google for the samples.
However, that’s not an end of the story. I wouldn’t write this post if the situation was not so tricky. Due to the fact, that web.config records are XML entries we do not have a bullet-proof storage of our entities, because SharePoint doesn't validate that XML. You can put unnecessary stoke (‘) or other symbols that will break the XML. SharePoint doesn’t provide any validation and you end up with the broken SPWebConfigModification :) Whatever you do, function throws exceptions and you can’t rollback your changes :(
There is a solution for this – manually update the XML records in [SharePoint_Config].[dbo].[Objects] table :) .Some SharePoint people will have the heart attack at this exact moment :) The solution is described there http://blog.thekid.me.uk/archive/2007/03/23/corrupt-webconfigmodifications-in-sharepoint.aspx. What you actually need to do is to find your broken the XML nodes with your web.config content and delete them.
It’s absolutely unsupported and not recommended solution, but sometimes your need “to cut the corners” :)
In some cases this modification is insufficient :) You need to update the [Title] row where column “[Name] = SharePoint - <yourSite>” as well, because web.config settings are stored in two places.
Additional story is how to update the XML rows. SQL Server Management Studio doesn’t allow you to update XML entries in editor, and UPDATE SET doesn’t work for XML as well. The only tool I know for such operations is Altova DatabaseSpy that provides you all functionality to update the XML
PS: to find the second location I spend about 2 hours, wearing a “bloodhound” hat, scrutinizing DB with profiler and other diagnostic tools, because SPWebConfigModification thrown exception all time. After I removed all custom entries everything started to work really smoothly.
Organizing documents in taxonomy is not an easy task, because there is no a “silver” bullet and “best practices” for such task – everything depends on the usage patterns. “Discovery, contribution and collaborations” are the key priorities you should manage first, and then build your design upon.
There are several types of taxonomies you have to consider in your design: Subject, Unit Based and Functional (thanks to Barb Blackburn to his description of the types)
Subject type is based on “subject terms” when you arrange you subjects in alphabetical order. This type works for well established terms that are unique in defined context and have no shared information – like family names, countries and etc. In case of terms ambiguity the thesaurus is used
Business-unit type is used to reflects the organization structures like departments/divisions and etc. The advantage is that such structure minimize number of documents, because they can be inherited, but disadvantage in duplicated information that have to be shared across structured elements.
Functional type is based on the produced activities, when you build taxonomy on the top of business process. The issue of such type is in the project files support that relate to the particular person/project. In such situation metadata is used to address this issue.
The summary of those types are incorporated in the following table
|Taxonomy Types ||Advantages ||Dissadvantages |
|Subject || |
- Common approach recognizable by most users (library, Yellow pages, internet sites)
- Many sources of existing and reusable schemes
-Requires understanding of terminology or supporting Thesaurus
|Unit-based || |
- Familiar to users (mimics most existing paper filing systems)
-Organizational changes require maintenance of the taxonomy
-Shared documents are difficult to classify
|Functional ||- Endures organizational changes ||- Difficult to address case files |
Today I was reviewing some of SharePoint Upgrade documents and researched this subject browsing for the available resources, when I found one quite interesting document that describes the installation and configuration steps.
It was posted by Yasir Attiq originally (you can find the actual MPP file there) Posting the content here, because people are asking me about such plan time to time. The most interesting part is that those guys are planning 8-12 hours on all tasks :)
|Task Name |
|SharePoint Upgrade & EPM Deployment |
| Take a full Machine Image for Full Backup of SharPoint Box |
| Review Software Availablility |
| Review Available Hardware |
| Obtain DNS Entries |
| Take Full SharePoint Backup of Existing Envioronment |
| Take Content DB SQL Backup |
| Uninstall SharePoint from Current Machine |
| Detach Current SharePoint Databases |
| Move Database to Different Folders |
| Prepare Machine 1 |
| IIS |
| ASP.NET 2.0 |
| ASP.NET 3.0 |
| Install Arabic Lanaguge Support |
| Install MOSS 2007 |
| Install Microsoft Project Server 2007 |
| Install Language Pack |
| Install Service Pack 1 of Office Servers |
| Install Language Pack 1 |
| Install WSS Infrastructure Updates |
| Install MOSS Infrastrcuture Updates |
| Install SKELTA Workflow Engine |
| Prepare Machine 2 (similar to Machine 1) |
| Prepare Machine 3 (similar to Machine 1) |
| Configuration |
| Machine 1 |
| Run Configuaration Wizard on Machine 1 |
| Start Excel Services Service |
| Machine 2 |
| Run Configuaration Wizard |
| Connect to SharePoin tFarm |
| Start Windows SharePoint Search Service |
| Start MOSS Search Service |
| Machine 3 |
| Run Configuaration Wizard |
| Stop Windows SharePoint Services Service |
| Connect to SharePoin tFarm |
| Start Project Application Service |
| Go back to Machine 1 and Login to Central Administration |
| Create SSP Admin Web Application on Port 2222 |
| Restore OLD Content DB on SQL Server |
| Create Web Application using Restored DB on Port 80 |
| Create New SSP |
| Select 2222 as Admin Site |
| Select SharePoint 80 as MySite Place |
| Configure Outgoing Email Settings |
| Configure Incomming Email Settings |
| Configure Search Settings |
| Configure Usage Analysis Services |
| Configure Profile Import |
| Configure Excel Services |
| Configure SKELTA |
| Project Server 2007 Configuration |
| Configure Project Web Access Site |
| Import Enterprise Resources |
| Configure SQL Analysis Services |
| Configure Administration Options of Project Web Access |
| Test Portal Web Site using a Domain Account |
| Test New PWA Site using a Domain Account |
| Test Incomming and Outgoing Settings |
| Test Content and People Search |
| Run Windows Update on All Machines |
| UAT and Signoff |
| Rollback Procedure |
| Restore the Norton Ghost Image of SharePoint Box |
| Remove all New Database and Attach the old databases |
| Test the Site and Fix any issues |
| Training |
| Importing Tasks from Portal to PWA |
| Project Server Basic Introduction |
| Creating Projects and Tasks |
| Task Updates and Approval |
| Publishing Projects |
| Project Server Role Definition |
| Project Complete |
Recently I found quite interesting article, describing how Enterprise Content Management systems allow you to reduce the document discovery costs http://www.aiim.org/infonomics/where-how-ECM-reduces-ediscovery-costs.aspx
The biggest cost is lurked in the area of the processing and analyzing information - we collected massive volume of unstructured data upfront and need the proper way to find to process our information. They say that the*manual* information processing from the moment we needed info to the time it's ready to be used is about 4 docs per minute. I found it quite slow process and that's what we need to automate to be productive and do our job - not to be a processing robots. The information should be ready in a moment, not in minutes.
For example, "These costs are the reason discovery costs for the average mid-sized to large enterprise range as high as $650,000—per lawsuit. Even responding to a regulatory action can be costly; we know of a firm that incurred total costs of almost $500,000 to produce the documents needed to respond to an SEC investigation."
I consider that SharePoint 2010 and supplementary components hight the ECM bar really hight to achieve the desired effect in these days.
More Posts « Previous page
- Next page »