Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: [image: Setup.JPG] https://communities.bmc.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/2-454538-69950/Setup.JPG So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the *Remedy mail and escalation server* for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Brad, Your design looks pretty standard. I usually setup server groups: 2 for users 1 for reporting 1 for admin Your server ranking is very important - keeps the functions specific to a server and provides redundancy. Thank you, Sandra Hennigan Remedy Developer From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of BradRemedy Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 5:38 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: [Image removed by sender. Setup.JPG]https://communities.bmc.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/2-454538-69950/Setup.JPG So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Hello Brad, If you are 100% sure that email engine and escalation are the only operation be handled by that particular server box then you do not need ITSM/SRM installed on it, but you will have to make sure your load-balancer ( in server group environment) shouldn’t send end user requests to this server. I would say: 2 user facing servers 1 admin/escalation/email engine server (non-user facing) 1 reporting server (non-user facing) Should work good for your business need. HTH. Best Regards, Kiran From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of BradRemedy Sent: 31 July 2014 15:08 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: [Setup.JPG]https://communities.bmc.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/2-454538-69950/Setup.JPG So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Hi Brad, Just to add some capacity management thoughts: For argument sake, lets say each user facing ARS can comfortably process 400 concurrent users (BMC say more but lets not start that one again). Then this means you have a total capacity of 800 concurrent users (before the graph starts to drop off). Which is great but be aware that if you have a projected concurrent user base of more than 400 e.g. 600, then if one ARS fails, your single instance is in trouble. People often make the mistake of just having two ARS facing servers for redundancy and not taking into account capacity management. Escalation/mail server - From my experience, people forget that escalations tend to make the largest and most *table scan* searches (not saying the filters/queries are not using indexes, but the fact they ask for more than 70% of the data). So thats big hits on memory and CPU. Especially when they process things like SLM measurements every minute etc. So therefore these servers will definable get busier over time (more time == more data) but more importantly, those functions are business critical and your design has them as a single point of failure. Therefore in my opinion, in answer to your questions, yes include it in the server group so it can fail them to the user facing servers. Yes it will have a negative impact in the event of a failure but you can't do without those functions. With regards to turning off the admin server. This is not an option if you join the single server to the server group. If you checked *that checkbox* while in the server group, it will complain and say something about it being handled by the server ranking/group. However you can have a server group with just one server. The rankings form will just have that one entry with all the functions assigned to it. Just my 2 pence worth :) Kind regards Danny -- Original Message -- From: BradRemedy bradrem...@gmail.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: 31/07/2014 10:38:02 Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion Sent: 31 July 2014 15:55 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of BradRemedy Sent: 31 July 2014 11:38 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Do you have a way to keep them from using the Admin MT in the future? When not running large queries but just because they can. And then they tell their friends and everybody starts using your MT :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tauf Chowdhury taufc...@gmail.com wrote: ** Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion *Sent:* 31 July 2014 15:55 *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg http://rkshs01.bcx.co.za/rs/25dkoFBy Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3 rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of * BradRemedy *Sent:* 31 July 2014 11:38 AM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: [image: Setup.JPG] https://communities.bmc.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/2-454538-69950/Setup.JPG So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the *Remedy mail and escalation server* for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Since it is just for the admins I guess you could change the http/https port daily :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com wrote: Do you have a way to keep them from using the Admin MT in the future? When not running large queries but just because they can. And then they tell their friends and everybody starts using your MT :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tauf Chowdhury taufc...@gmail.com wrote: ** Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion *Sent:* 31 July 2014 15:55 *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg http://rkshs01.bcx.co.za/rs/25dkoFBy Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of * BradRemedy *Sent:* 31 July 2014 11:38 AM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: [image: Setup.JPG] https://communities.bmc.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/2-454538-69950/Setup.JPG So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the *Remedy mail and escalation server* for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Jason, Configure tomcat realms. Then you can have a popup like login just for that midtier. Its like htaccess is for Apache. http://wiki.metawerx.net/wiki/SecuringYourSiteWithContainerManagedSecurity Regards Danny -- Original Message -- From: Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: 31/07/2014 16:28:51 Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Since it is just for the admins I guess you could change the http/https port daily :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com wrote: Do you have a way to keep them from using the Admin MT in the future? When not running large queries but just because they can. And then they tell their friends and everybody starts using your MT :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tauf Chowdhury taufc...@gmail.com wrote: ** Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion Sent: 31 July 2014 15:55 To:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of BradRemedy Sent: 31 July 2014 11:38 AM To:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Thanks Danny! I have been meaning to look up how to do this. I knew it was possible and have poked around a bit but just haven't got around to actually doing it. Although I would rather we are not storing a static/clear text password in a file. But... I was thinking a password for each of my team. Maybe we should just have one shared account for our team. That would serve the purpose and avoid use need to keep track of another personal password. Jason On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Danny Kellett dkell...@javasystemsolutions.com wrote: ** Jason, Configure tomcat realms. Then you can have a popup like login just for that midtier. Its like htaccess is for Apache. http://wiki.metawerx.net/wiki/SecuringYourSiteWithContainerManagedSecurity Regards Danny -- Original Message -- From: Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: 31/07/2014 16:28:51 Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Since it is just for the admins I guess you could change the http/https port daily :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com wrote: Do you have a way to keep them from using the Admin MT in the future? When not running large queries but just because they can. And then they tell their friends and everybody starts using your MT :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tauf Chowdhury taufc...@gmail.com wrote: ** Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion *Sent:* 31 July 2014 15:55 *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg http://rkshs01.bcx.co.za/rs/25dkoFBy Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [ mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of * BradRemedy *Sent:* 31 July 2014 11:38 AM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: [image: Setup.JPG] https://communities.bmc.com/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/2-454538-69950/Setup.JPG So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the *Remedy mail and escalation server* for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Welcome Jason. This is the easiest/basic auth. If you don't want passwords in the user.xml then you can use tomcat realms from a db source and/or a class http://www.christianschenk.org/blog/setup-your-own-tomcat-security-realm/ Not done this myself but looks pretty easy. -- Original Message -- From: Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: 31/07/2014 18:12:19 Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Thanks Danny! I have been meaning to look up how to do this. I knew it was possible and have poked around a bit but just haven't got around to actually doing it. Although I would rather we are not storing a static/clear text password in a file. But... I was thinking a password for each of my team. Maybe we should just have one shared account for our team. That would serve the purpose and avoid use need to keep track of another personal password. Jason On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Danny Kellett dkell...@javasystemsolutions.com wrote: ** Jason, Configure tomcat realms. Then you can have a popup like login just for that midtier. Its like htaccess is for Apache. http://wiki.metawerx.net/wiki/SecuringYourSiteWithContainerManagedSecurity Regards Danny -- Original Message -- From: Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: 31/07/2014 16:28:51 Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Since it is just for the admins I guess you could change the http/https port daily :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com wrote: Do you have a way to keep them from using the Admin MT in the future? When not running large queries but just because they can. And then they tell their friends and everybody starts using your MT :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tauf Chowdhury taufc...@gmail.com wrote: ** Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion Sent: 31 July 2014 15:55 To:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of BradRemedy Sent: 31 July 2014 11:38 AM To:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation
Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please.
Uh yeah. We run the queries for them. :) It's a once a quarter thing usually. Might have to look into the realms though. That looks interesting. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com wrote: ** Do you have a way to keep them from using the Admin MT in the future? When not running large queries but just because they can. And then they tell their friends and everybody starts using your MT :) On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tauf Chowdhury taufc...@gmail.com wrote: ** Peter, We also use the same server group name across environments and use host files on our local machines to administer each environment when needed. In addition to the diagram below, I like having a dedicated mid tier to the admin box outside of the user load balancer as well. It helps since a lot of forms don't display properly in the WUT anymore. Also, I'm assuming you're not allowing unqualified searches on the user facing boxes. I've had instances where a user needed to run a query beyond the limit we set so having a mid tier pointing to the admin box allows for those one off requests as well. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Peter Romain p.romain.arsl...@parsolutions.co.uk wrote: ** To ask a related question to anyone that has done this already – do you build all the AR Servers with the same hostname then use the hosts file on each server to resolve the name back to itself? This way there’s no need to edit any configurations if the server is cloned. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Dean van Deventer - Business Connexion Sent: 31 July 2014 15:55 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** image001.jpg Hi Brad Where is your mid tiers ? do you have load balancers to ensure your HA ? My end picture would look like this bellow You would need a load balancer to ensure your HA Load all boxes exactly the same you can move the functions with the rankings Only allow server 1 and 2 to be available via the LB for user access your 3rd server could still perform the actions you set out for it to perform. So even if server 3 is struggling your users won’t be affected. Without the LB you won’t really have HA, with the picture below you could actually reboot server as you wish and your users won’t have any impact. My 5c o image002.png From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of BradRemedy Sent: 31 July 2014 11:38 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Server Groups - Your thoughts please. ** Firstly, thanks for any help you guys can offer. We are busy upgrading to ITSM 8.1 and want to setup server groups to ensure we have HA in our environment. Currently on our live environment now we have a single live server which makes us a little nervous. Our DB is a clustered DB with a separate instance handling just reporting. This keeps unnecessary traffic off our live DB which is only for Remedy. We are looking at having the following architecture setup: So Remedy Live App Server 1 and Server 2 are both Physical Servers. The Remedy Mail and Escalation Server is Virtual Machine server. We wanted to keep escalations and mail processing off our mail servers and wanted them to rather focus on providing a ITSM and SRM Service to our users. What I want to know, is the above possible ? Do I need to install the ITSM and SRM applications on the Remedy mail and escalation server for it to work or can I just do a Remedy 8.1 Core installation? Do I also need to include it in the server group but with its only job as processing mail and escalations or can I keep it out the server group?. Also, If I setup the setup group with just the App server 1 in it for now, can I turn off the Administration Server option and use it as normal and only activate the Administration option when we add in the second server to the server group at a later stage ? Are there any problems with the above plan or something I am missing? Any advice is appreciated. Thanks _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
