Share via

Site Server Migration Strategies

Franz Schenk 386 Reputation points
2022-03-07T10:06:27.693+00:00

Have an existing SCCM current branch (2107) infrastructure with a central administration site with an attached primary site. All site systems are running Server 2012 R2 OS and SQL 2014 Enterprise Edition. We manage about 1500 SCCM clients in different customer AD domains. All clients are attached to the primary site.

Our goals are

  1. Eliminating the central administration site, which should be supported since version 2103.
  2. Migrate the primary site server to a current operating system and SQL server.

Have seen reports that people performed inplace upgrades of existing primary site servers. That is something we hesitate to do, mainly because of difficult fallback possibilities if something doesn't work. We are considering one of the following migration paths:

  1. create a new primary site, migrate all content from the CAS to the new primary site, assign the clients to the new primary site, and remove the CAS
  2. create a new site server from the existing primary site server in "passive mode", replicate the site database with SQL high availability group, then perform manual failover from the site server. Finally, we will remove the CAS.
  3. Prepare the new primary site server with SQL (same version that on the existing primary site server), then migrate the site server database (for example according https://www.deploymentresearch.com/moving-the-configmgr-current-branch-database-to-another-server-as-in-back-to-the-primary-site-server/) to the new designated primary site server. Then configure this site server as "passive mode" site server. Switch this server to active and remove the CAS.

Has anyone practical experience with similar migration scenarios and goals? Which scenario is the most recommended? Or are there better solutions? Thank you in advance for any help.
Franz

Community Center | Not monitored
0 comments

1 answer

Sort by: Most helpful
Most helpful Newest Oldest
  1. Amandayou-MSFT 11,166 Reputation points
    2022-03-08T05:32:11.67+00:00

    Hi @Franz Schenk ，

    Based on my experience, it is recommended that we use the first choice, it requires the less operation and less errors, and more important, during the period of migration, it does not affect the existing environment.

    This is just my opinion, if anyone has other ideas, please let we know.

    If the answer is the right solution, please click "Accept Answer" and kindly upvote it. If you have extra questions about this answer, please click "Comment".
    Note: Please follow the steps in our documentation to enable e-mail notifications if you want to receive the related email notification for this thread.

    1 person found this answer helpful.

Your answer

Answers can be marked as 'Accepted' by the question author and 'Recommended' by moderators, which helps users know the answer solved the author's problem.