SCVMM 2012 SP1 CTP2 crash (display resoltuon too high?)

I’ve deployed SCVMM 2012 today and noticed the service was crashing (causing a disconnect of my console session). It appears that the cause of this was my Remotefx resolution being outside of the expected range. The reason I believe it was this is that the error (virtual Machine Manager – event ID 1 stated System.infexOutOfRangeException: Index was outside the bounds of the array. at Microsoft.VirtualManager.Utils.MonitorResolutonLimits.GetMonitorResolution(int32 numMonitors, Int32 monitorsResolutionIndex)

In addition to this I noticed that the dynamic memory maximum amount was also outside of a supported configuration limit of SCVMM. Since changing the memory limits and setting any remotefx adaptor resolutions to 1280 x 1024 the crashes and event logs have stopped. (edit: Its been about an hour now and no service crashes!)

Why Hyper-v??

If you ever need a list of reasons as to why Server 2012’s hypervisor is a good thing here it is:

It will be interesting to see what occurs in hypervisor space now that Windows has started to get some legs 😉

My first Windows 8 Crash

So after installing WIN8 CP on my Lenovo IdeaCenter I’ve just had my first crash.
The event log shows a large number of WARNINGS in the app log:

Log Name: Application
Source: ESENT
Date: 24/07/2012 13:46:18
Event ID: 910
Task Category: Performance
Level: Warning
Keywords: Classic
User: N/A
Computer: touchy
taskhostex (1544) The database cache size maintenance task has taken 60 seconds without completing. This may result in severe performance degradation. Current cache size is 14 buffers above the configured cache limit (127 percent of target). Cache size maintenance evicted 0 buffers, made 7750 flush attempts, and successfully flushed 0 buffers. It has run 7732 times since maintenance was triggered.
Event Xml:





So far I can’t find anything concrete on this….I’ll have to see if it occurs again before I worry :)

Re-inventing the wheel

Recently I’ve spent some time looking at Microsofts System Center Service Manager 2012. In doing this i’ve been investigating not only the technology aspects but also the service management aspects. Often implementing a service management tool these days would normally be to replace an exiting system, however there are still a number of businesses who do not have tools.

With this in mind i’m developing best practises based on standard frameworks to provide a summarised view on recommended approaches to implementing a new service management tool. Whilst drawing from information in my head is useful i deci to go back to the books. A recent conversation made this statement stand out:
“a fool with a tool is still a fool”

I think its important for us not to underestimate the complexities of implementing or changing a service management tool. I have a tool (i know i just said about tools)that i created based on ITIL’s PMF (process maturity framework) to help assess clients ITSM maturity and give me greater insight into the environment (this tool requires knowledge to be effective).

Both ITIL and TOGAF have guidance on how to make change successful, my advice is to follow the standard rules, however good a product (component in this case) can be, if you don’t have the people, process and technology in alignment then your heading down a path for an upset user base, late nights troubleshooting and most likely increasing call volumes.

So the fruits of my research so far:

  • Use existing reference architectures (ITM tools have been deployed before)
  • Follow the guidance of ITIL, while it may not be specific for this product the advice is sound and having the correct policies, processes and procedures is key.
  • ITIL has tool selection guidance.
  • A framework that is iterative should be used (damming’s based)
  • Understand the as-is not just in terms of technology, but also in terms of people and process.
  • Don’t rush, getting this right should be more important than getting this “installed”
  • Requirements, Communication and Training…you need all three

If your embarking on a ITSM tool greenfield or refresh implementation then good luck, if you follow the well established guidance you should be moving to a good place.

(Here is a reference I came across (SDLC), haven’t had time to read all the content yet but it seems like it has some good material in it –

System Center service manager web portal issues

It seems the configuration routines for installing the portal components don’t configure it’s or the web config files correctly for https. Manual editing of the web config files, bindings and .net application settings URL (on the service manager portal) are required. On share point foundation I also had to manually start the share point web services root application pool and modify the web config files to only have https bindings (I removed the http ones).

Life on an iPad

I’ve just bought an iPad as I’m working on Boyd related projects so I figured I should get more to grips with some consumer devices. Given that 80 percent of corporate BYOD initiates have iPads in scope I figured this was the sensible choice. Worse case scenario my girlfriend will have a new gadget in a month so, but you never know I might become a convert. Speaking of which the typing on this even in portrait mode is really good.

Moving onto the techie bits, I’ currently blogging using the WordPress app. I’m going to try and leave my laptop on the desk for a while to see if life in the iPad world retires my laptop.

Rock, scissors, paper, web?

I’ve been playing with some simple web technology this weekend and have wondered something about human behaviour. We have technical capability to design and deploy applications of great complexity to provide an enhanced user experience, immersing people in another world for one aim or another (entertainment, sales, to share knowledge). However In business I notice internally companies often revert back to a very basic simplistic form, discarding technical capabilities for old tried and trusted methods, with adoption of new ways of working trailing behind.

Not to say companies do not embrace new technologies… its just in my experience its the few rather than the many.