Benefits and risks to upgrades and migrations

This topic explains the benefits and risks associated with migration and upgrade:

Note

In all scenarios, BMC recommends that you install new 11.0 Integration Services. This means you must allocate hardware resources for the new Integration Services, regardless of whether you upgrade or migrate.

Migration pros and cons

The following table identifies the pros and cons of migrating to the latest version.

Pros Cons
  • Potentially incorrect or otherwise undesired configuration is not carried forward in the new Infrastructure Management system from the old system.

  • There are no historical or on-going issues with data gaps in the new Infrastructure Management system.

  • A migration eliminates any user confusion related to functionality and data differences between data collected from older agents versus newer PATROL Agents all being displayed in the same UI. It is simpler to keep like functionality segregated between systems; that is, Infrastructure Management Server 11.0 with Integration Services 11.0 and newer PATROL Agents, while keeping the earlier servers with earlier Integration Services and earlier PATROL Agents. 

  • Provides a platform for a complete and clean rework of monitoring configuration without the worry of older data collection configuration challenges having to be handled going forward.

  • You can avoid “intermediate” upgrades. If the existing Infrastructure Management Server(s) are of a version that is not supported for a direct upgrade to the latest version, you have to upgrade them first to an upgradable version. This mainly applies to version 8.6; however, you also need to consider service packs for versions 9.0, 9.5, and 9.6.

  • There is little or no downtime associated with a migration.

  • You have to run parallel environments for a period of time until the migration is complete.

  • Historical data is not maintained in the new system. However, it is available in the old system until the old system is decommissioned.

  • There is work involved in defining configuration settings including user preferences, graph views, and so on in the new Infrastructure Management Server(s). An upgrade preserves those settings.

  • The migration method involves installing new Infrastructure Management Server(s), not upgrading the old Infrastructure Management Server(s). The ability to use earlier Integration Service nodes (versions 9.5 and 9.0 with the appropriate levels of service packs) is not supported out-of-the-box with a fresh, new installation of the Infrastructure Management server. The earlier Integration Services are supported out-of-the-box only when the Infrastructure Management Server is upgraded. (With custom configuration after installation, older Integration Services can be supported in a Infrastructure Management 11.0. environment. However, BMC does not recommend this in a migration unless you are forced to use older PATROL Agents that require older Integration Services for an extended period of time.)

  • You must have the additional hardware and resources required for Infrastructure Management 11.0 to support a migration.

Migration risks

The following are risks identified with migrating instead of upgrading:

  • The requirement to run parallel systems can result in confusion due to users having to view trends in multiple systems.
  • A migration can extend the time required to get to Infrastructure Management version 11.0. A complete migration requires complete configuration of the 11.0 environment including Infrastructure Management policies, and upgrading PATROL Agents before they can be integrated in the new environment. This can extend the time required to complete the project so that all agents report into the new 11.0 environment. 

Note

This risk exists for all scenarios when you consider “full Infrastructure Management 11.0 functionality”. However, with an upgrade, existing older PATROL Agents report into Infrastructure Management 11.0 immediately after the upgrade, even though “full Infrastructure Management 11.0 functionality” is not in place for them.

Upgrade pros and cons

The following table identifies the pros and cons of upgrading to the latest version.

Pros Cons
  • You do not have to run parallel environments as you do with a migration. Assuming proper sizing, the server(s) already provisioned for the older environment can be leveraged for 11.0.
  • You do not have to reconfigure all the settings. 
    NOTE: You must review all the settings. Some settings such as heap will have to be reset. Policies need to be re-created, edited, or created for the first time.

  • After upgrading the TrueSight Infrastructure Management Servers, the earlier Integration Service nodes, adapters, and older PATROL Agents continue to function as they did in the earlier TrueSight Infrastructure Management Server.

  • Historical data is maintained in the new system because the old system becomes the new system.

  • You can initially upgrade only the server and install new Integration Service nodes, followed by upgrading the agents over time. The Infrastructure Management Server 11.0 interoperates with the older Integration Services and older data flow model.

  • You can move PATROL Agents in logical groups to a new 11.0 Integration Service node as the agents are upgraded to a compatible version while handling data for all versions in the new Infrastructure Management Servers.

  • Additional hardware and resources are generally not required to support an upgrade. However, you must review Infrastructure Management scalability as you plan the upgrade, and allocate enough drive space for the upgrade to run.

  • Incorrect or otherwise undesired configuration will be carried forward to the new 11.0 system from the old system.
  • You may potentially experience on-going issues with data gaps in the new 11.0 system until all the PATROL Agents are upgraded and communicate through the 9.6 Integration Services.
  • If you are starting with Infrastructure Management 8.5, you must first upgrade to either Infrastructure Management 9.0 SP1 or at least to Infrastructure Management 8.6 SP3 prior to upgrading to 11.0.
  • You must ensure that the latest Service Pack is applied to the current Infrastructure Management Server(s) prior to the upgrade.
  • Users may experience differences in functionality and content in the same UI because variations may exist depending on the agent versions from which the data is sourced. The following are some examples (not a complete list):
    • Annotated data will be available only for attributes collected by the 9.5 agents. Annotated data for the same attributes will not be available where collected by older agents.
    • There will be differences in the granularity of trended data for attributes. Data from older agents will be less granular, generally one data point every five minutes. Data from the 9.5 agents can be granular to one minute.
    • Some attributes continuing to be collected by older agents may have data gaps while the same attributes collected by the 9.5 agents may not have data gaps.
    • Certain new functionality in Infrastructure Management 11.0 will not be available for data collected by older agents.

Data differences is be retained for historical data after the agents are upgraded. These differences exist in the same Operations Console and it will not be readily apparent to users why the differences occur. This may result in confusion and excessive support calls unless the users are well trained to be aware of the differences.

Upgrade risks

The following are risks related to upgrades from all versions except where otherwise specified:

  • Poor perception of the new solution. The significant change between older versions and Infrastructure Management 9.6 results in a variation of the functionality, capability, and behavior which is likely to cause confusion for users. Users may also perceive issues in Infrastructure Management 11.0 that are actually related to data collected before the upgrade and/or before upgrading agents.
  • Improper decisions. Visualization might be confusing to users considering old versions of KMs compared to 11.0 KM versions being displayed, as upgraded and new Infrastructure Management 11.0 policy-controlled agents join the Infrastructure Management 11.0. This can result in improper decisions.
  • There might be altered event behavior associated with event management cell Knowledge Base configuration differences that were not accounted for.
  • Downtime associated with upgrading the Infrastructure Management Server(s), especially if upgrading from version 8.5, due to multiple iterations in the upgrade process.

Was this page helpful? Yes No Submitting... Thank you

Comments