Any harm keeping 2 distinct URLs for JTS and RTC respectively on a single server?
We are tasked with upgrading RTC 4.0.7 to 6.0.6 via 5.0.2, as this is a 2-step upgrade.
Below are what have been either in place, or planned and procured, i.e. we are not allowed to change:
We are to plan the upgrade through the shortest route possible, while keeping it transparent to users.
We are planning to use TST env as POC for PRD, and have cloned the PRD DBs over to TST, with DB backup synced to AppSide index backup.
Our proposed use of hosts file spoofing on TST was shot down by management for the risk of contamination of PRD, as PRD and TST are not on isolated networks. So we will have to recourse to "server rename" on TST to be able to start the upgrade with PRD-cloned DBs.
Here is our current plan:
We will proceed same on PRD without any "server rename" as the start-from DBs are the same existing ones on PRD.
There are worries about the unusual use of 2 distinct public URIs for single host topology for JTS and RTC respectively.
We couldn't think of or google for any harm using the same 2 public URIs on a single host topology. We have also validated the use of 2 distinct public URIs on POC with a fresh install of 6.0.6. Pls let us know if we miss any consequences serious enough having to:
|
Be the first one to answer this question!
Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.
Comments
PRD upgrade