Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 35 replies
  • Subscribers 1 subscriber
  • Views 30451 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Upgrading? Need advice? Let us know!

lilhavoc

I want to ask you, our esteemed customers, what information Sophos could provide to make upgrading easier. This applies to upgrades from any version, but I'd love to be able to address people's concerns about the upgrade from Enterprise Console version 3 to version 4 especially.

We've got a great couple of upgrade guides, but what else can we do? What would you like to know more about?

Want to tell us how to do our jobs?? :smileyvery-happy: We'd love to hear to your suggestions, so let's talk!!

Thanks,

Lil

:1039


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    Curiously I'd be interested in a test perhaps you could carry out

    Yeah, sure that's what I get paid for (last time I got a shirt from Sophos was in 2005, but it's good quality and still looks great) :smileyvery-happy:

    You are distributing/pushing from your SUM to a remote share over a slow link? Even if this is not what you want me to test the idea sparked my interest.

    So I created a share in a laptop and throttled the adapter to 10Mbit full duplex (shame as I have 1Gb connectivity). Initial populating of the CIDs (Recommended - Win, Mac and Linux) "never" finished 'cause the laptop somehow lost the default gateway before SUM could fill the CIDs and it always starts from the beginning after a failed attempt (seems to check cidsync.upd which is the last file written).  The server's (2003 EE, SP2 - BTW) performance was not noticeably affected, CPU usage showed the usual pattern. Setting the adapter to full speed the next update cycle filled the share. Watched two updates (new IDEs) today and nothing out of normal on the server. 

    Decided to install a child SUM on the machine (why had it to be WIn 7? Doesn't exactly facilitate SUM install) and am now waiting for SUM to complete it's first update - which will not be soon, link utilization is about 500kbit (sic!) per second. You'll have to wait until tomorrow for the results Wonder whether using a child SUM is preferable over distribution when a slow link is involved.

    Christian

    :1825
Reply
  • 0

    Curiously I'd be interested in a test perhaps you could carry out

    Yeah, sure that's what I get paid for (last time I got a shirt from Sophos was in 2005, but it's good quality and still looks great) :smileyvery-happy:

    You are distributing/pushing from your SUM to a remote share over a slow link? Even if this is not what you want me to test the idea sparked my interest.

    So I created a share in a laptop and throttled the adapter to 10Mbit full duplex (shame as I have 1Gb connectivity). Initial populating of the CIDs (Recommended - Win, Mac and Linux) "never" finished 'cause the laptop somehow lost the default gateway before SUM could fill the CIDs and it always starts from the beginning after a failed attempt (seems to check cidsync.upd which is the last file written).  The server's (2003 EE, SP2 - BTW) performance was not noticeably affected, CPU usage showed the usual pattern. Setting the adapter to full speed the next update cycle filled the share. Watched two updates (new IDEs) today and nothing out of normal on the server. 

    Decided to install a child SUM on the machine (why had it to be WIn 7? Doesn't exactly facilitate SUM install) and am now waiting for SUM to complete it's first update - which will not be soon, link utilization is about 500kbit (sic!) per second. You'll have to wait until tomorrow for the results Wonder whether using a child SUM is preferable over distribution when a slow link is involved.

    Christian

    :1825
Children
No Data
Unfiltered HTML