Ghost references of the old primary Management Server, while trying to re-register the DW

Alberto_FumagalliAlberto_Fumagalli Customer IT Monkey ✭

Hi all, I used the p_PromoteActiveWorkflowServer stored procedure to promote a new MS server as the primary one. Before performing promotion, I've de-registered the DW server.

Workflows now run on such promoted server, but if I try to register the DW again, then the registration fails because of missing Data Access Service availability. My environment is based on version 1807.

I've captured a network trace and I discovered that SCSM is still looking for the old primary server in order to complete the registration.  In my opinion, some tracks remained on the SCSM DB, even if I used the official MS stored procedure.

Is there a way to know which are the involved SQL tables that may host such wrong information?

I've tried to look at the tables mentioned here: https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/mihai/fixing-service-manager-data-warehouse-registration-information/ but with no luck :(



Answers

  • Adam_DzyackyAdam_Dzyacky Customer Contributor Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 10
    As I recall...

    If you head into the Data Warehouse tab in the Console, head into Data Source, then click on your operational management group, and then scroll down in the below pane. There is a section called "Data Warehouse CMDB Source" which should list your SCSM SQL server but may have the incorrect SDK server defined (e.g. your old one) post promotion.

    I'm going through my notes, but I think the table exists in the ServiceManager DB (although that feels counter intuitive as i type it) and its in the neighborhood of the following SQL table - dbo.MT_Microsoft$SystemCenter$DataWarehouse
  • Alberto_FumagalliAlberto_Fumagalli Customer IT Monkey ✭
    As I recall...

    If you head into the Data Warehouse tab in the Console, head into Data Source, then click on your operational management group, and then scroll down in the below pane. There is a section called "Data Warehouse CMDB Source" which should list your SCSM SQL server but may have the incorrect SDK server defined (e.g. your old one) post promotion.

    I'm going through my notes, but I think the table exists in the ServiceManager DB (although that feels counter intuitive as i type it) and its in the neighborhood of the following SQL table - dbo.MT_Microsoft$SystemCenter$DataWarehouse
    Hi :)
    Unfortunately, there's no DW wunderbar available in the console, because I'm just no longer able to perform the registration due to of such strange old server tracks.
    The previous table didn't return any record, as well as that one: MT_Microsoft$SystemCenter$DataWarehouse$CMDBSource

    :s

  • Adam_DzyackyAdam_Dzyacky Customer Contributor Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm still guessing here/looking myself - 

    Try a similarly named series of tables in the DWStagingAndConfig in the DW server.
  • Alberto_FumagalliAlberto_Fumagalli Customer IT Monkey ✭
    edited June 10
    I've just found a reference to the old server in this table: MT_Microsoft$SystemCenter$ResourceAccessLayer$SdkResourceStore, which is hosted on the OpDB.
    I manually corrected the wrong server name (even if I don't know I need to fix in other tables...) and...After such change, the registration completed, but...The wunderbar didn't appear.
    So, I've used the following utility and syntax in order to correctly write information in both databases:
    SCSMRegisterDW.exe -u:MYSERVICEACCOUNT -sm:PRIMARYWFSERVER -dw:DWSERVER -a:add

    Now the wunderbar is available and Get-SCDWSource cmdlet looks like to properly show the datasource
  • Adam_DzyackyAdam_Dzyacky Customer Contributor Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    That is most excellent to hear.
  • Alberto_FumagalliAlberto_Fumagalli Customer IT Monkey ✭
    I'm still wondering why the official MS stored procedure is not aware of such information to be replaced, together with the one which is included in other tables included in the stored procedure T-SQL code.. :o
  • Adam_DzyackyAdam_Dzyacky Customer Contributor Monkey ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 10
    Agreed.

    It feels like the documentation while specific in scope (i.e. Promote a Workflow server) should at least be aware of the downstream implication for the DW when this process is invoked.
Sign In or Register to comment.