Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

[Joel D Sender]

Carina,

If there aren't any hooks into ITSM, then the other apps can co-exist on AR
server.

My only caution is to make sure that the server is large enough to handle
the load.

ITSM is both large and CPU intensive.

HTH,

Joel

Joel Sender  *   jdsen...@earthlink.net  *  310.829.5552

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Burns, Carina
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 8:58 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

 

** 

Thank you all for the replies!   

We have no interest in keeping our custom Help Desk app and would replace it
with service desk.  So in that respect it will be a clean install with
problem categories, locations, user and support staff info the only thing
migrating.  Once we get more information on how asset management works, we
may replace our current custom tech inventory tracking form as well.

What I was mostly concerned about is whether or not our other vertical apps
(Textbook Tracking, Chg Mgt for our finance platforms) could co-exist with
ITSM.  I can import those applications with their respective data as they
are stand alone - no hooks to the help desk form we have.

As far as using overlays, I wouldn't want to alter any workflow on OOB ITSM
but I could imagine needing to create a few views based on job function as
I've had to do that with our custom HD app.  I could also see management
wanting a few specific escalations and notification options

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joel D Sender
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 4:37 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

 

** 

Carina,

I may be spitting into the wind here, but you may want to compare migrating
to ITSM vs adding "user friendly/self service" to what is already working.

As previously noted the best approach is a clean install of ITSM and
determine what functions need to be added to the OOB config.

This analysis is a major effort. Once the additional functions are
identified, the correct approach is to add only buttons/active links that
open external (to ITSM) forms with their own workflow.

The ITSM overlays will preserve these links without any impact upon or from
ITSM.

Adding the missing functions to ITSM needs to be done very carefully, with
an understanding of how overlays work.

These complex modifications, as Doug Mueller often points out, are 
discouraged.

 

An alternative would be to keep the custom app (wind speed increasing) and
create "user friendly/self service" views on old forms, or new front-end
forms.

This will allow 'pushing' data to the existing application to take advantage
of the 'mature' workflow. 

 

I suspect that the level of effort to analyze, re-build 'must have'
functions, integrate and deploy ITSM will be significantly greater than
building a shiny new front end.

If management is insisting on moving to an (almost) all OOB ITSM, at least
you can identify the full cost.

 

Hope this helps,

Joel

Joel Sender  *   jdsen...@earthlink.net  *  310.829.5552

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Fawver, Dustin
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:04 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

 

** 

I have to agree with Christian.  The forms and such that we're running on
ARS 7.1 previously came from the 3.x branch.  The previous developer had
added fields and workflow in order to keep things current for business
processes.  I'm working on doing a migration to 9.1 instead of an in-place
upgrade.  I'm having to ensure that I don't import forms that were already
present in the 9.1 installation.

 

I've pretty much got the forms and data, except for attachment pools, copied
over.  I'm currently tweaking the interface the best that I can and adding
in some additional functionality that management wants.  As far as Dev
Studio goes, I'm working in Base Development mode for the forms that I'm
modifying since I need to be able to update the elements that were
previously on the form.  The "user friendly / self-service" bit was also a
major driver for the migration.

 

I hope the upgrade goes well for you.

 

--Dustin Fawver

 

HelpDesk Technician

Information Technology Services

East Tennessee State University

faw...@etsu.edu

 

 

  _  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
on behalf of Smerz, Christian 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:41 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1? 

 

** 

Hi Carina,

Typically custom apps are easy to upgrade.  The big things to look for are
what AR features are being used that are deprecated in the new version.  If
your app is running on 8.1.02 there shouldn't be much issue to upgrade that
I can think of.

With respect to overlays, they are usually in place to protect BMC
application objects.  If you're a custom app shop and don't have BMC apps in

Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

[Burns, Carina]

Thank you all for the replies!
We have no interest in keeping our custom Help Desk app and would replace it 
with service desk.  So in that respect it will be a clean install with problem 
categories, locations, user and support staff info the only thing migrating.  
Once we get more information on how asset management works, we may replace our 
current custom tech inventory tracking form as well.
What I was mostly concerned about is whether or not our other vertical apps 
(Textbook Tracking, Chg Mgt for our finance platforms) could co-exist with 
ITSM.  I can import those applications with their respective data as they are 
stand alone - no hooks to the help desk form we have.
As far as using overlays, I wouldn't want to alter any workflow on OOB ITSM but 
I could imagine needing to create a few views based on job function as I've had 
to do that with our custom HD app.  I could also see management wanting a few 
specific escalations and notification options

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joel D Sender
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 4:37 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

**
Carina,
I may be spitting into the wind here, but you may want to compare migrating to 
ITSM vs adding "user friendly/self service" to what is already working.
As previously noted the best approach is a clean install of ITSM and determine 
what functions need to be added to the OOB config.
This analysis is a major effort. Once the additional functions are identified, 
the correct approach is to add only buttons/active links that open external (to 
ITSM) forms with their own workflow.
The ITSM overlays will preserve these links without any impact upon or from 
ITSM.
Adding the missing functions to ITSM needs to be done very carefully, with an 
understanding of how overlays work.
These complex modifications, as Doug Mueller often points out, are  
discouraged.

An alternative would be to keep the custom app (wind speed increasing) and 
create "user friendly/self service" views on old forms, or new front-end forms.
This will allow 'pushing' data to the existing application to take advantage of 
the 'mature' workflow.

I suspect that the level of effort to analyze, re-build 'must have' functions, 
integrate and deploy ITSM will be significantly greater than building a shiny 
new front end.
If management is insisting on moving to an (almost) all OOB ITSM, at least you 
can identify the full cost.

Hope this helps,
Joel
Joel Sender  *   jdsen...@earthlink.net  *  
310.829.5552

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of 
Fawver, Dustin
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:04 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

**

I have to agree with Christian.  The forms and such that we're running on ARS 
7.1 previously came from the 3.x branch.  The previous developer had added 
fields and workflow in order to keep things current for business processes.  
I'm working on doing a migration to 9.1 instead of an in-place upgrade.  I'm 
having to ensure that I don't import forms that were already present in the 9.1 
installation.



I've pretty much got the forms and data, except for attachment pools, copied 
over.  I'm currently tweaking the interface the best that I can and adding in 
some additional functionality that management wants.  As far as Dev Studio 
goes, I'm working in Base Development mode for the forms that I'm modifying 
since I need to be able to update the elements that were previously on the 
form.  The "user friendly / self-service" bit was also a major driver for the 
migration.



I hope the upgrade goes well for you.



--Dustin Fawver



HelpDesk Technician

Information Technology Services

East Tennessee State University

faw...@etsu.edu




From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG>> on behalf of Smerz, Christian 
mailto:cesm...@eprod.com>>
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 11:41 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Custom apps + Remedy v9.1?

**
Hi Carina,
Typically custom apps are easy to upgrade.  The big things to look for are what 
AR features are being used that are deprecated in the new version.  If your app 
is running on 8.1.02 there shouldn't be much issue to upgrade that I can think 
of.
With respect to overlays, they are usually in place to protect BMC application 
objects.  If you're a custom app shop and don't have BMC apps in place at this 
point, I wouldn't think overlays really come into play.

Regards,
Christian Smerz

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Burns, Carina
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 10:20 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
S

Re: Performance Issues - Multitenancy

[Brian Pancia]

Shawn,


Thanks.  That ended up being the fix.


Brian




From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)  on 
behalf of Shawn Scutchings 
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 3:12 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Performance Issues - Multitenancy

**
We had a similar issue and were provided the following by BMC:

The Engineer assisting us with this issue has reviewed the information provided 
and agrees the query we see taking to complete are running row level access. He 
would like you to test disabling the new RLS implementation and use the old 
implementation to see if the issue persists or not.

1.  Please open the Centralized Configuration form in the
 com.bmc.arsys.server.shared section
2.  Add the following parameter:
 Disable-New-RLS-Implementation with a value of true
 Disable-New-RLS-Implementation: T
3.  Restart the servers in the group

This change will use a LIKE clause to allow the database to search the columns 
directly. Once the change has been made the servers restarted, please enable 
API, SQL, and Filter logging and reproduce the issue. If the performance impact 
is seen searching the fields that have drop-down menus for non admin users 
after the change has been made, please run the log zipper to gather and send 
the log files and forward the zip file along with the name of the user who 
performed the search.

Fixed our issue…worth a try.

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2016 1:03 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Performance Issues - Multitenancy

**
Brian,
Turn on SQL Logging and perform the same search between the two different users 
and compare the SQL, maybe even provide the sql here for analysisthe 'slow 
vs fast' queries should be fairly obvious what's causing the difference.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Brian Pancia 
mailto:panc...@finityit.com>> wrote:
**

We are running into some serious performance issues with multitenancy.  We're 
on BMC ITSM 9.1 SP1 and SQL Server 2012.  If I do a search on a form like 
CTM:People with an account that has unrestricted access the search comes back 
in about 2-3 seconds for 13 records.  That same search with a user that is 
restricted to a certain company will come back in 70 seconds, which is a 
significant difference.  That is the first issue.  The second issue is that the 
database server CPU utilization will spike to 100% during the searches.  During 
the unrestricted user test not a big deal because it is only a couple seconds 
and no one notices the spike.  However, for the other user it brings the system 
to a halt for 70 seconds.  If the user kills their session prior to the search 
complete the search will hang in the database and consume 100% of the CPU 
indefinitely.



Any recommendations would be appreciated.  We have done all the BMC recommended 
performance tuning on the systems.



Thanks,



Brian


DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" 
and have been for 20 years_
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this e-mail and its attachments 
contain confidential information belonging to the sender, which is legally 
privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or action in reliance upon the contents of 
the information transmitted is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
information in error, please delete it immediately.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"