I have created a Web Content Management library for use in WebSphere Portal. At the moment I'm using import-wcm-data to import the library, then I need to add some additional propeties to 2-3 files on the server under Resource Environment Providers and then restart particular services so those changes are detected.
Can anyone explain the benefits of using a paa over writing a simple bash (or similar) script to automate this process?
I don't understand if I get any advantages when using paa, or is paa even capable of updating properties files and restarting services?
I have been working intensively with PAA files and I must say that it is a very stable way of deploying a app requirering multiple depl steps and components.
It does need a startup process but is well worth it in a multi server environment.
You can do all the tasks that you can do in a Ant file as well as using the wsadmin script interface. I only update res env settings and the such in WAS and do not touch any props files for that reason since all settings are stored in WAS.
In my experience, a PAA is not a good method if you're merely importing a content library.
I don't think I understand why you are doing the import manually and not syndicating, but even if there's a good reason not to syndicate, the PAA process was too involved and required too many precursor actions (deleting libraries, remove PAA, deploy PAA and then activate the portliest) to be a viable option for something as simple as importing a WCM library.
Since activating the portlets I was importing with the PAA was an extra step, I don't believe you can restart applications either.
Related
What is the best way to dynamically provide configuration to a vespa application?
It seems that the only method that is talked about is baking configuration values into the application package but is there any way to provide configuration values outside of that? ie are there cli tools to update individual configuration values at runtime?
Are there any recommendations or best practices for managing configuration across different environments (ie production vs development) ? At Oath/VMG is configuration checked into source control or managed outside of that?
Typically all configuration changes are made by deploying an updated application package. As you suggest, this is usually done by a CI/CD setup which builds and deploys the application package from a git repository whenever that changes.
This way it is easy to ensure changes have been reviewed (before merge), track all changes that have been made and roll them back if necessary. It is also easy to verify that the same changes which have been deployed and tested (preferably by automated tests) in a development / test environment are the ones that are deployed to production - because the same application package is deployed through each of those environments in order.
It is however also possible to update files in a deployed application package and create a new session from this, which may be useful if your application package has some huge resources. See https://docs.vespa.ai/documentation/cloudconfig/deploy-rest-api-v2.html#use-case-modify
I'm doing a small pilot project trying to implement Sql Server Data Tools sqlproj projects in order to better bring our databases under source control. In my organization, we have separate no-trust domains for test environments of various purposes, so these domains of course have their own isolated active directory accounts.
The documentation is still somewhat sparse and I don't really know where to go for more information on this toolset, especially considering the extraordinary amount of churn in Visual Studio's history of database assets.
So far, the only idea I've really had would be to make separate sqlproj projects specifically for the security objects each separate domain, separate from the other schema objects. My hope is that somehow I can tie my actual database schema to those at deploy time and also to somehow switch which security project I'm using in the build. I have no idea if that's feasible though.
Has anyone that uses Visual Studio sqlproj projects had to deal with this? Is there a best practice for this kind of thing?
If you have different settings for each environment then the easiest is to either leave them out and not delete them when you deploy or to have a post deploy script that sets them up manually.
Normally for handling different configurations I would suggest using sql cmd variables (on the properties of the project there is a page for setting these up) but when you create a login you cannot use a variable to create it so that falls over!
There is an example on how to setup a post deploy wrapper for just this case:
http://schottsql.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/ssdt-setting-different-permissions-per.html
Good luck with ssdt, there are some strange quirks but it enables so much!
Twist to the standard “SQL database change workflow best practices”
Background
ASP.NET/C# Web App
MS SQL
Environments
Production
UAT
Test
Dev
We create patch scripts (XML and sql) that are source controlled in Mercurial. We have cmd line utility that installs patches to DB (utitlity.exe install –patch) from a Release folder the build packages. Patches have meta data that helps with when patch should run and we log patches installed in a table in the target DB. All these were covered in the 3 year old question:
SQL Server database change workflow best practices
Our Problem/Twist
I think this works well for tables, views, functions and stored procedures. We struggle with application configuration data. Here are some touch points on application configurations.
New client. BA performs system study and fit analysis. Out of this comes a configuration word document of what application configurations need to be setup. Note some of these may also come in phases over time. We need to get these new configurations into the system for the developer and client UAT.
Developer works on feature request or bug fix. A new configuration change comes out of that change. The configuration needs to make it into the system for testing and promotion to UAT and up.
QA finds that the developer missed an associated configuration change. That configuration needs to make it into the system for promotion to UAT and up.
Build goes to UAT. Client performs acceptance testing but find they really want to change another unassociated configuration and have it promoted with the changes. In other words they found they want to change a business process by a configuration. The configuration needs to make it into the system for promotion to PRD.
As the client operates in PRD they may tweak application settings. These configurations need to make it into the system for future development and testing.
The general issue is making sure we are accounting for all the configurations and accidently not miss any during promotions which causes grief.
Our Attempts At A Process
a. We have had member of the QA team to write patches (xml and sql) and check those in. This requires a build to make sure those get into the package. With this approach it really just took care of item 1 above and we fell apart on the other items. The nice thing is for the items that made it into the patches it was just an install with the utility.
b. A developer threw together a Config page on the application. All the configurations could be uploaded and downloaded via XML document but it requires the app to be running. For item 1, member of QA team would manually setup configurations in the application and then would download the Config.xml file. This XML file would be used to upload configurations in other environments. We would use text diff tool to look at differences between config.xml files from different environments. This addressed item 1 and the others items but had problems. Problems were not all configurations made it into the XML document (just needs to be fixed by developer), some of the configurations didn’t have a UI in the application so you still had to manually go to the database on some, comparing the XML document with text diff was difficult at time (looked mostly due to sorting but I’m sure there are other issues), XML was not very human readable and finally the XML document did not allow for deleting existing incorrect or outdated configs.
c. Recently we went with option B, but over time for a new client we just started manually tracking configs and promoting them manually by hand (UI and DB) through the promotions. Needless to say lots of human errors.
So we have been looking at solutions. Eventually it would be great to get as much automation in as possible. I’m looking at going with the scripting approach and just focusing on process, documentation and looking at using Redgate data compare in addition to what we had been doing with compare on config.xml. With Redgate we have to create views though and there is no way to create update scripts from that approach except to manually update the scripts. It does at least allow a comparison without the app running. I’m also looking at pulling out the configs from our normal patches and making it a system independent of the build (utility.exe –patch –config). When I say focus on process it will be things like if we compare and find a config change either reported by client or not, we still script it, just means we have to have a process in place to quickly revalidate config install before promoting to the next level. As for documentation looking at making the original QA document a living document instead of just an upfront document. The goal is to try and enhance clarity and reduce missing configurations during promotion. Unfortunately it doesn’t improve speed of delivery.
Does anyone have any recommendations or best practices to pass along. Thanks.
Can I ask exactly what you mean by application configuration. I'm interpreting that as both:
Config files in the web application
Static reference data inside the database
Full disclosure I work for Red Gate. You might be interested in taking a look at Deployment Manager, it's a deployment tool that deploys applications, databases and configuration. It's free for up to 5 projects and target servers.
The approach it uses is to package application code and the database state into packages. These packages can be deployed into dev, test, staging and production environments. The same package is deployed to each environment.
Any application configuration that needs to change between environments is handled in one of the ways below:
Variable substitution in web.config. The tool allows you to specify override values for variables in these files, and set these per environment/server
Substituting the web.config file per environment.
Custom powershell scripts that are run pre/post deploy. You could use these to execute custom SQL based on the environment or server.
Static data within the database, using SQL Source Control's static
data feature. I've written a blog post about how to supply
different sets of static data to different environments/customers.
This allows you to source control the application configurations and deploy them to different environments.
anyone has past experience with gradle? i'm thinking of using it for continuous deployment... i'm considering either using my own scripts (python) or gradle.
can anyone tell from experience which way he thinks recommanded to go? note i already use maven and i don't intend to move away for my dependency management and project management.
thanks
We have implemented Gradle-based deployment and environment management in a big governmental project (100+ servers). But we had to develop a custom set of plugins (which is actually rather straight forward process in Gradle) to handle tasks like remote SSH command execution through Groovy DSL, creation of application server domains/clusters (we are using WebLogic), application/configuration deployment.
We also are thinking of integrating Gradle with Puppet for easier Linux administration.
If you are coming from Java world, then using Gradle (which is Groovy-based) would be rather simple for you, because you can reuse your Java/Ant/Maven/Groovy knowledge to write scripts. Also an ability to create DSLs in Groovy may allow you to build interesting abstractions. Gradle also has very clean API which allows building nice dependencies between tasks. It also integrates very well with Maven infrastructure and you can reuse all Ant tasks.
Yes, Gradle-based deployment possible with gradle-ssh-plugin
Here is an article with good usage example.
When creating an auto updating feature for a .NET WinForms application, how does it update the DLLs and not affect the currently running application?
Since the application is running during the update process, won't there be a lock on the DLLs (because those DLLs will have to be overwritten during the update).
Usually you would download the new files into a separate area. Then shutdown and restart and at startup you look for and use the new files if found. Always keeping a last known working version on the side so that the user can revert to something that definitely works if the download causes problems.
ClickOnce is a good technology from Microsoft that does this for you and you can use it directly from Visual Studio 2008.
You'll have to shutdown your application and restart it, as other people have already commented.
I wrote an open-source code to do just that in a transparent mode - including an external update application to do the actual cold update. See http://www.code972.com/blog/2010/08/nappupdate-application-auto-update-framework-for-dotnet/
The code is at http://github.com/synhershko/NAppUpdate (Licensed under the Apache 2.0 license)
I have a seperate 'launcher' application that checks for updates via a web service. If there are updates, it downloads them and then executes my application, which is in a seperate assembly.
The other alternatives are using things like ClickOnce, or downloading the files to a seperate area and restarting the app, as someone else mentioned.
Be warned about ClickOnce, though - it's not as flexible as it sounds. And if you deploy to a system that requires elevating your program to a higer security level to run, you might run into problems if you don't have a certificate for your app installed. I found it very difficult to get straight answers on the Internet to things like certificate management when it comes to ClickOnce. If you have a complex app, you may want to just roll your own updater, which is what I ended up having to do.
If you publish via ClickOnce, all of that tends to be handled for you. It has it's own pro's and con's but usually easier than trying to code it all yourself.
Both Wikipedia and 15seconds have decent info on using ClickOnce, how it works, etc.
As others have stated, ClickOnce isn't as flexible as rolling your own solution but it is a LOT less complicated. It has a small learning curve at first, but with pretty much everything bundled into Visual Studio and the use of Wizards, it usually doesn't take long to stumble onto a working solution.
As deployments get more complex (i.e. beyond than just having prerequisites or application code that needs updating) and you need to do a lot of post-install or pre-install tasks, there are things like WiX which give you somewhat of a hybrid solution between Windows Installer and ClickOnce, with the cost of flexibility being a much steeper learning curve.
The only reason I try to avoid custom installers is that you end up spending way too much time trying to get it just right to handle a bunch of different "What If" scenarios...
These days Windows can do such updates automatically for you with AppInstaller if your app is packaged in the MSIX package.
It downloads the new version of the app in another folder inside ProgramFiles\WindowsApps, then when a user runs the app via the start menu, the system knows what folder it should use. The previous version gets deleted when not in use.
If you want to know how to package your app this way I collected my findings in this answer.