در طی هفته گذشته, من همکار and I were doing some work for a client in NYC. We were testing a different aspects of a MOSS implementation using their "standard" ایستگاه کاری ساخت (در مقابل به عنوان لپ تاپ های ما). While doing that, ما را به چند اشتباه را با پیروی از این مراحل اجرا:

• باز کردن یک سند Word MS از طریق ویندوز اکسپلورر (که با استفاده از WebDAV هستید).
• ایجاد یک تغییر.
• آن را ذخیره کنید.

ما به این درک رسیدم که برخی از (معمولا اولین بار) ما سند را نجات داد, the save didn’t "stick." Save did not save. We would pull that document back up and our changes simply were not there.

ما این مسئله ریشه در این نکته را درک نمی کنند, but we figured that we should make sure that the latest MS Office service pack had been installed on that work station. The IT folks went and did that. We went through the test again and we discovered a new problem. When we saved it, ما در حال حاضر این خطا:

این بار, به نظر می رسید آن را مانند هر تغییر, در واقع, ذخیره شده, whether we answered Yes or No to the scripts question.

ما در نهایت به حال نگاهی به نسخه واقعی از دفتر و معلوم است که ایستگاه های کاری در حال اجرا دفتر کارشناسی ارشد 2000 به همراه سرویس پک 3 نشان می دهد که تحت راهنما -> About as "Office 2002".

اخلاقی داستان: من همیشه Office استفاده خواهد شد 2003 به عنوان حداقل پایه نسخه دفتر من در هنگام استفاده از WebDAV هستید و خزه.

</پایان>

مشترک شدن در وبلاگ من.

(برای مقاصد موتور جستجو, این متن خطا است):

خط: 11807

کاراکتر: 2

خطا: شی این اموال و یا روش را پشتیبانی نمی کند

کد; 0

URL: http://sharepoint01/DocumentReview/_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?location=Documents/1210/testworddocument.doc&dialogview=SaveForm

آیا می خواهید به ادامه اجرای اسکریپت ها بر روی این صفحه?

In one or my very first blog posts, I described the overall process we followed to migrate a customer from SPS 2003 to MOSS. A reader left a comment asking for more detail and here it is.

For that migration project, we had to find a good way to move a lot of SPS 2003 documents over to MOSS. The initial load was easy enough. Create a new target document library in MOSS and use windows explorer to move the documents.

This is the new document library:

Open up two windows explorers. Point the first at SPS 2003 and the second at the new document library in MOSS. The following screen shot shows this. Note that the top browser is actually pointing at my c:\temp drive, but you can imagine it pointing to an SPS 2003 document library:

After that drag and drop operation, my target looks like this:

Now it’s time to deal with the metadata. Assume we have just one column of metadata for these documents named "location." We can see from the above "all documents" view that the location is blank. It’s easy enough to use a data sheet view to enter the location, or even go into each document’s properties one by one to add a location. Let’s assume that there is no practical way to assign the location column a value automatically and that end users must do this by hand. بعلاوه, let’s assume there are hundreds of documents (maybe thousands) and that it will take many many days to update the metadata. As we all know, no one is going to sit down and work for four of five days straight updating meta data for documents. در عوض, they will break that out over a period of weeks or possibly longer. To facilitate this process, we can create an "untagged data" view as shown:

اکنون, when someone sits down to spend their allocated daily hour or two to tag migrated documents, they can use the "untagged documents" view to focus their effort:

As users tag documents, they drop off this list.

This notion of an untagged data view can also help with a class of data validation problem people inquire about on the forums. خارج از کادر, there’s no way to prevent a user from uploading a document to MOSS and then not enter meta data. We can specify that a particular site column is mandatory and the user won’t be allowed to push the save button. اما, if the user uploads and then closes the browser (or uses windows explorer to upload the document), we can’t force the user to enter meta data (دوباره, از جعبه).

This approach can be used to help with that situation. We can use a "poorly tagged data" view to easily identify these documents and correct them. Couple this with a KPI and you have good visibility to the data with drill-down to manage these exceptional circumstances.

</پایان>

مشترک شدن در وبلاگ من.

این هفته, I’ve struggled a bit with my team to get MOSS installed in a simple two-server farm. Having gone through it, من درک بیشتری برای انواع مشکلات مردم در انجمن MSDN و جاهای دیگر گزارش.

پیکربندی مزرعه نهایی:

• SQL / صفحه اول / اینترانت WFE در داخل دیوار آتش.
• WFE در DMZ.
• نوعی از فایروال بین DMZ و سرور داخلی.

قبل از اینکه ما شروع پروژه, we let the client know which ports needed to be open. During the give and take, به جلو و عقب که بیش از, ما هرگز به صراحت دو چیز مهم است گفت::

1. SSL معنی است که شما نیاز به یک گواهینامه.
2. The DMZ server must be part of a domain.

روز اول, we showed up to install MOSS and learned that the domain accounts for database and MOSS hadn’t been created. To move things along, we went ahead and installed everything with a local account on the intranet server.

در این مرحله, سردرگمی بیش از گواهی اس اس ال و کشف, متاسفانه, decided to have our infrastructure guy come back later that week to continue installing the DMZ server. در این زمان, ما معماران راه حل های پیش رو با مسائل کسب و کار نقل مکان کرد.

آخر هفته می رود و توسط مشتری به دست آوردن گواهی.

مرد زیرساخت های ما نشان می دهد و در می یابد که سرور DMZ به هر دامنه ملحق نشده (هر دو دامنه محیط با اعتماد محدود و یا دامنه اینترانت). We wasted nearly a 1/2 روز به روز بر آن. If we hadn’t let the missing SSL certificate bog us down, we would have discovered this earlier. Oh well….

یکی دیگر از روز می گذرد و کمیته های مختلف امنیتی, اشخاص علاقه مند و (نه چندان) تماشاگران بی گناه همه اتفاق نظر دارند که آن را OK برای پیوستن به سرور DMZ با دامنه اینترانت (این POC است, بعد از همه, نه یک راه حل تولید).

Infrastructure guy comes in to wrap things up. This time we successfully pass through the the modern-day gauntlet affectionately known as the "SharePoint Configuration Wizard." We have a peek in central administration and … یی به دست چپ رفتن! … DMZ server is listed in the farm. We look a little closer and realize we broke open the Champaign a mite bit early. WSS services is stuck in a "starting" وضعیت.

داستان کوتاه مدت, it turns out that we forgot to change the identity of the service account via central administration from the original local account to the new domain account. We did that, دوباره فرار جادوگر پیکربندی و voila! We were in business.

</پایان>

مشترک شدن در وبلاگ من.

Although it’s not literally true, as a practical matter, an internet-facing web front end in a DMZ must be in a domain (i.e. not some standalone server in its own little workgroup). It doesn’t need to be in the same domain as the internal WFE(ها) and other servers (and probably shouldn’t), but it needs to be a domain.

My colleagues and I spent an inordinate amount of time on a proposal which included SharePoint pre-requisites. This included a comprehensive list of firewall configurations that would enable the DMZ server to join the farm and so forth. متاسفانه, we failed to add a sentence somewhere that said, to the effect, "the whole bloody point of this configuration is to allow your DMZ WFE server, in a domain, to join the internal farm."

A perfect storm of events, where we basically looked left when we might have looked right, conspired to hide this problem from us until fairly late in the process, thus preventing me from invoking my "tell bad news early" rule.

Sigh.

مشترک شدن در وبلاگ من.