[otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Hi, Can anyone help with some obvious issues around setting up a load balanced OTRS? - Does last db write always win? I imagine there's no built in protection against it. - Are HTTP sticky sessions required and if so, how can they be configured? I imagine OTRS needs some built in support to

[otrs] 3.2.1 upgrade ERROR 1091 Can't DROP 'ticket_answered';

Did anyone got this during ]# cat scripts/DBUpdate-to-3.2.mysql.sql | mysql otrs ERROR 1091 (42000) at line 20: Can't DROP 'ticket_answered'; check that column/key exists Can I go on ? I'm "upping" from a 3.1.6. thank you in advance. MV

Re: [otrs] 3.2.1 upgrade ERROR 1091 Can't DROP 'ticket_answered';

Did you run the upgrade script twice? The ticket_answered column really should have been available in the Ticket table, although it was no longer used. -- Mike On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Marco Vannini wrote: > Did anyone got this during > > ]# cat scripts/DBUpdate-to-3.2.mysql.sql | mysql o

Re: [otrs] 3.2.1 upgrade ERROR 1091 Can't DROP 'ticket_answered';

Hi Michiel, Yes, I tryed and obviously I had to comment out some row before the one failed but than I encountered the same on other indexes ...really strange, but than, the .pl has gone without problems. [root@HMCVR0004 otrs]# cat scripts/DBUpdate-to-3.2.mysql.sql | mysql otrs ERROR 1091 (42000)

Re: [otrs] 3.2.1 upgrade ERROR 1091 Can't DROP 'ticket_answered';

Marco: "I had to comment out some row before the one failed " -- I'm not sure what you mean here. Glad it worked for you... I think? -- Michiel On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Marco Vannini wrote: > Hi Michiel, > > Yes, I tryed and obviously I had to comment out some row before the one > failed

Re: [otrs] 3.2.1 upgrade ERROR 1091 Can't DROP 'ticket_answered';

:D yes, I mean, if I had to reexecute the script the first line "ALTER TABLE ticket DROP group_read;" would fail so I commented out all the command just executed. Seems to work ... :D On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Michiel Beijen wrote: > Marco: > "I had to comment out some row before the one

[otrs] YAML error message after upgrade to 3.2.1

Hi, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11 (x86_64) VERSION = 11 PATCHLEVEL = 2 OTRS 3.2.1 Was previously 3.1.12, then upgraded to 3.2.0.beta5, then upgraded to 3.2.1 We have the following packages installed: FAQ

Re: [otrs] YAML error message after upgrade to 3.2.1

Hi, Florian advised to install the YAML perl module, but this was installed already: Check Perl Modules installed. All Perl modules needed are currently installed. ... o YAML::XS.ok (v0.38) Perhaps someone has an idea. Regards Rudolf Von: otrs-boun...@otrs.org

Re: [otrs] YAML error message after upgrade to 3.2.1

Hi, Florian pointed me to other possible causes for general upgrade errors. Even though I installed from the rpm I still executed the following: (Step 7 of the UPGRADING) cd /opt/otrs bin/otrs.SetPermissions.pl /opt/otrs --otrs-user=otrs --web-user=wwwrun --otrs-group=nogroup --web-group=www

Re: [otrs] YAML error message after upgrade to 3.2.1

Hi Rudolf, "As I had installed 3.2.0.beta5 previously, the MySQL DBUpdate pre and post scripts reported errors, but only because all the new database entities already existed." You should not have executed this script at all! This is only for the 3.1 to 3.2 update. If you ARE already on 3.2, eve

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Thoughts: Rather than invent a application-specific solution, look at Linux-HA (www.linux-ha.org). They’ve solved most of these problems in a neatly packaged way. There’s existing code to handle session affinity and most of the request distribution process. If you stor

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Hi, While I appreciate the general advice, please note I'm not trying to reinvent anything. Instead, I want to prepare for natural problems that OTRS will run into when reaching a size that requires load balancing. For example, articles can't be stored in the database for installations where arti

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Regarding system IDs... you couldn't give each system it's own system ID, otherwise they would function as distinct systems (each system wouldn't be able to act on tickets generated by the other etc.). Shared systems would have to share the same system ID. And OTRS sessions can be stored either in

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Thanks for the input. I placed my replies inline. Have a look please. On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Steven Carr wrote: > Regarding system IDs... you couldn't give each system it's own system ID, > otherwise they would function as distinct systems (each system wouldn't be > able to act on tick

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

While I appreciate the general advice, please note I'm not trying to reinvent anything. Instead, I want to prepare for natural problems that OTRS will run into when reaching a size that requires load balancing. OK, I was jotting down some thoughts – sorry if it came off wrong. More details inli

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

On 29 January 2013 19:29, Bogdan Iosif wrote: > bogdan: Thanks for this info. I was under the impression the SystemID is > used by OTRS only when deciding which emails to process from an assigned > inbox via PostMaster > It is, but that would mean it wouldn't be able to process incoming emails f

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

It is, but that would mean it wouldn't be able to process incoming emails from the other OTRS system, the system ID gets embedded in the full ticket "number", the system ID is primarily used to allow separate OTRS systems to send emails back and forth (assuming the system IDs are different) wit

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Now this is some mighty useful info. Thanks a lot. I'm not familiar with LVS or Linux-HA (mostly used MS platforms until ~ recently) so the next question may be born out of confusion: You have the load balancing performed by machines runnings LVS and the Linux-HA is running on the app nodes? Just

[otrs] Email Strings

Is there a way to exclude the prior email strings in emails when they go out to customers in ORTS? What happens is we end up with a really long page worth of duplicate information when the customer responds to the email and it comes back in as a new article. With excluding the old information

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

| That is what I have always assumed, if you look in the sessions table in the DB in the session_value column you can see that there is all of the user's configuration in one big string. bogdan: Efficient and simple. I'm surprised. I assumed OTRS stores some user session data in memory/disk to pro

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

I'm not familiar with LVS or Linux-HA (mostly used MS platforms until ~ recently) so the next question may be born out of confusion: You have the load balancing performed by machines runnings LVS and the Linux-HA is running on the app nodes? Correct. LVS handles session distribution and session

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

Beautiful. Thanks a LOT for sharing this info. It took a big uncertainty off the table as I was unsure if OTRS can handle load balancing without tweaking it in some ugly ways. The DMS integration is very nice. If authentication / authorization against the DMS were an issue in your setup, how did y

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

On topic of big databases: databases store data. Binary data is still data. I do understand that large databases means large backups and thus long backup time but if you have the data on disk you also have the data and you need to back it up as well. So to some extent it is: your database is large,

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

I would love OTRS to shift the ticket increment into the database, the less I can store in the filesystem the better as far as I'm concerned. Does anyone know if this has been suggested or would anyone be willing to give their code to the project to try and get it implemented mainstream. Steve ---

Re: [otrs] NLB (load balancing) OTRS

bogdan: I think if the shared file system would be required just for attachments, it wouldn't need to be very fancy. I think OTRS doesn't modify what it has already written on disk for articles / attachments. So it only does reads and additional writes. No editing. It does rely on a consistent