Jump to content


wat4lunch

Established Members
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

wat4lunch's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

1

Reputation

  1. Fixed my issue after a call to Microsoft. Management point was failing to install and additionally had the "Could not install bgbisapi.msi" issue but fixing the Management Point install sorted the bgbisapi issue. If you have a similar issue on Server 2012 this may help you - seems a bizarre fix as it was a newly built server but did the job :-) 1. Uninstall the MP role from the console. Wait for the uninstallation to finish in MPSETUP.log 2. Delete CCM name instance from WMI. a. Open Wbemtest and connect to root b. Click enum classes and choose "recursive" then click okay c. Under Query Result go to _NAMESPACE and double click it. d. Hit the "Instances" button on the right hand side. e. Then highlight the _NAMESPACE.name="ccm" value and click delete to remove it. 3. Try to install MP once again.
  2. I've got exactly the same issue after installing SCCM 2012 SP1 onto Windows 2012 server with a separate DB on SQL 2012 (no SP) with CU5. Would be great if someone has a fix for this - I'll post my findings if I solve it myself.
  3. Hi all, First post so first wanted to commend you on a fantastic site - has been a great source of knowledge learning how to use SCCM 2007. So much so i'm now responsible for our 2012 migration :-) Having some issues deciding on the best method for the SQL side of things, as Microsoft don't seem to have a best practise for this. Was wondering how people have decided on whether to co-locate the SQL database on the site server or not. We have probably 2,500 clients, but initially I wanted to have it on a remote SQL Cluster so we can get some resiliency for the DB (We'll be waiting for SP1 for the site install) However, after a bit more reading co-locating may be the best bet; - Less server overhead - Better performance (found this here suggesting a cluster can cause performance degradation) - Simpler implementation - Mirroring of DBs isn't supported so DB backup would have to be managed by SCCM site server anyway On the other hand, if we use a SQL 2012 Cluster we could use the Always on feature (if supported) and use Hyper-V 2012 replicas for the site server) to give us a tasty resiliant solution......waiting to hear from Microsoft if this would work. Does anyone have any experience with weighing this up or advice for why we should co-locate? Thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.