locked
Installing Project Server 2013 onto an existing SharePoint 2013 farm RRS feed

  • Question

  • I was asked to come up with some system requirements for adding Project Server 2013 to our existing SharePoint 2013 farm. Is this recommended?

    I have heard mixed responses regarding this, in training and on the web, indicating that it is not a good idea to add Project to a heavily used farm. Our current farm consists of three (3) web front-end servers (load balanced), three (3) application servers and two SQL servers (clustered). We have about ten heavily used site collections and many service applications enabled and in use.

    Would it be best to create a new farm for Project? My other concern is patching. I've been told that Project has a different patching schedule than SharePoint and that patches for Project have been known to break other features of SharePoint. Is this true?

    Thursday, November 19, 2015 12:57 PM

Answers

  • It's really up to your organization and how much they want to spend and how much you want to manage (and if you use Chef/Puppet/Salt type tools to manage your infrastructure this may not be a consideration for you) 

    You could:
    (1) utilize your current infrastructure
    OR
    (2a) add an application server and database server just for Project Server
    (2b) add a single application server and utilize your current DB server
    (2c) keep/utilize one of your current application servers and add a new database 
    OR 
    (3) create a new farm (which is pretty much #2a) 

    Yes, my answer is vague but what do you consider heavily used?  Are your currently sites running slow or are they performing fine?  Are your databases maxed out or are they operating at a normal level?  All questions (and more) that have to be assessed and since you've not provided any information on your current infrastructure it's kind of difficult to make a recommendation for you ..

    For the over 5 years of patches I've applied, I've yet to run into any issues for any of my customers... there are considerations you have to think about in regards to custom code, custom SQL tables/views, custom XYZ you've done which is why some organizations wait for ONLY service packs (some do PU's and SPs) and not monthly CU's. 

    Since you're running with a more complex infrastructure, that has a lot more than a standard 1 WS/1 DB; you should have a test/dev environment to run tests on patches... if not well that's something else you should probably asses about your environment(but that's not for me to make a recommendation for) (and HOPEFULLY you've been performing patch testing anyway in your current environment in a test/dev environment).  

    The current patch schedule for PS and SP have them released at the same time - and even if they were released at different times you could still wait until the patches are released at the same time and apply the patches concurrently (SP first then PS)

    The above is all just my .02 and take it for what it's worth (and since it was freely given... :-/ )  - your organization has to determine the cost it wants to bear....  If you did have a test environment, which it seems like you dont, you could add PS to the current test environment and judge for yourself... but again these things are up to your organization


    If this answers your questions please mark as answered

    kbwrecker

    • Marked as answer by JM Estrada Tuesday, November 24, 2015 8:32 PM
    Friday, November 20, 2015 12:26 PM

All replies

  • It's really up to your organization and how much they want to spend and how much you want to manage (and if you use Chef/Puppet/Salt type tools to manage your infrastructure this may not be a consideration for you) 

    You could:
    (1) utilize your current infrastructure
    OR
    (2a) add an application server and database server just for Project Server
    (2b) add a single application server and utilize your current DB server
    (2c) keep/utilize one of your current application servers and add a new database 
    OR 
    (3) create a new farm (which is pretty much #2a) 

    Yes, my answer is vague but what do you consider heavily used?  Are your currently sites running slow or are they performing fine?  Are your databases maxed out or are they operating at a normal level?  All questions (and more) that have to be assessed and since you've not provided any information on your current infrastructure it's kind of difficult to make a recommendation for you ..

    For the over 5 years of patches I've applied, I've yet to run into any issues for any of my customers... there are considerations you have to think about in regards to custom code, custom SQL tables/views, custom XYZ you've done which is why some organizations wait for ONLY service packs (some do PU's and SPs) and not monthly CU's. 

    Since you're running with a more complex infrastructure, that has a lot more than a standard 1 WS/1 DB; you should have a test/dev environment to run tests on patches... if not well that's something else you should probably asses about your environment(but that's not for me to make a recommendation for) (and HOPEFULLY you've been performing patch testing anyway in your current environment in a test/dev environment).  

    The current patch schedule for PS and SP have them released at the same time - and even if they were released at different times you could still wait until the patches are released at the same time and apply the patches concurrently (SP first then PS)

    The above is all just my .02 and take it for what it's worth (and since it was freely given... :-/ )  - your organization has to determine the cost it wants to bear....  If you did have a test environment, which it seems like you dont, you could add PS to the current test environment and judge for yourself... but again these things are up to your organization


    If this answers your questions please mark as answered

    kbwrecker

    • Marked as answer by JM Estrada Tuesday, November 24, 2015 8:32 PM
    Friday, November 20, 2015 12:26 PM
  • kbwrecker,

    Thanks for the reply. When I state heavily used, I mean we have large amounts of data and really large site collections in the 30-60GB range each. There are about ten heavily used collections. We have three web front-end servers, each with 12GB RAM and four CPU cores and three Application servers each with 24GB of RAM and four cores also. The app and web servers are virtual and then we have two physical SQL servers which are clustered. We're not having any operational slowdowns, but knowing our needs, adding Project to this farm could require considerable database storage and since we only have two clustered servers I want to avoid any negative impact to the farm. We do have a test environment, which is a little scaled down (2 WFE, 2 APP, 1 SQL), and I would most certainly do this in test before production roll-out. I was just more concerned about what, if any, negative impact we would have by adding Project to our current farm.

    Appreciate the info!


    Monday, November 23, 2015 2:59 PM
  • It seems like you are fine if you choose any of the three options I laid out above - 

    Do you have any other questions?

    Please mark as answer if the above answered your question

    Tuesday, November 24, 2015 3:19 PM