ITPro's taking the SharePoint 2013 red pill

ITPro’s taking the SharePoint 2013
A Journey down the rabbit hole
Red Pill

Jason Himmelstein
jhimmelstein@sentri.com
@sharepointlhorn

Jason’s
• Microsoft vTSP
• virtual Technology Solutions Professional

• SharePoint Foundation Logger
• http://spflogger.codeplex.com
• Blog: www.sharepointlonghorn.com
• Twitter: @sharepointlhorn
• LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jasonhimmelstein
• SlideShare: http://www.slideshare.net/jasonhimmelstein
• Email: jase@sharepointlonghorn.com

• Author of Developing Business Intelligence Apps for SharePoint
• http://bit.ly/SharePointBI

Wheels?

Where we are going, we don’t need wheels!

Dependencies and Prerequisites

Load balanced or routed requests

Web tier
Web servers with
query component

Application server with:
Application tier • Central Administration
• Search administration
component
• Crawl component

Database server with:
Database tier • Central Administration
configuration and content
databases
• Farm content database
• Search administration database
• Crawl database
• Property database

SharePoint 2010 vs. SharePoint “2013” Comparison:
Component SharePoint 2010 Minimum Requirement SharePoint “2013” Minimum Requirement

Processor 64-bit, four cores 64-bit, four cores

RAM 4 GB for developer or evaluation use 4 GB for developer or evaluation use

8 GB for production use in a single server 8 GB for production use in a single server or
or multiple server farm in a multiple server farm

Hard disk 80 GB for system drive 80 GB for system drive
Maintain twice as much free space as you have RAM for Maintain twice as much free space as you have RAM for
production environments. production environments.

Component SharePoint 2010 Minimum Requirement SharePoint “2013” Minimum Requirement

Processor 64-bit, four cores for small deployments 64-bit, 4 cores for small deployments

64-bit, eight cores for medium 64-bit, 8 cores for medium deployments
Deployments
RAM 8 GB for small deployments 8 GB for small deployments

16 GB for medium deployments 16 GB for medium deployments

Hard disk 80 GB for system drive 80 GB for system drive

Hard disk space is dependent on the size Hard disk space is dependent on the size of your
of your SharePoint content SharePoint content

Hardware Requirements
Memory Processor Disk
8 GB x64 1x4 80 GB (OS)

24 GB x64 1x4 80 GB (OS)

12 GB x64 1x4 80 GB (OS)

Hardware and softwarerequirementsforSharePointServer2013 http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262485(v=office.15).aspx)

Component SharePoint 2010 Minimum Requirements SharePoint “2013” Minimum
Requirements
SQL Server The 64-bit edition of Microsoft SQL Server The 64-bit edition of Microsoft SQL
2005 with Service Pack 3 (SP3). Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 1.

The 64-bit edition of Microsoft SQL Server
2008 with Service Pack 1 (SP1) and
Cumulative Update 2

The 64-bit edition of Microsoft SQL Server
2008 R2
Windows The 64-bit edition of Windows Server 2008 The 64-bit edition of Windows Server
Server with SP2 2008 R2 Service Pack 1 (SP1)

The 64-bit edition of Windows Server 2008
R2

Minimum Software Requirements

Web Server (IIS) role .NET 4 DGR Update KB Information Protection &
Application Server role(s) 2468871 Control Client (MSIPC)
Windows Identity Foundation SQL Server 2008 R2 Native Sync Framework Runtime v1.0
(WIF 1.0 and 1.1) Client (x64)
.Net Framework version 4.0 Open Data Library (ODataLib) Windows PowerShell 3.0

Software Requirements

Hardware and softwarerequirementsforSharePointServer2013 http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262485(v=office.15).aspx)

Deployment Scenarios
SharePoint 2013 SharePoint 2010

Workgroup Unsupported Supported

Domain Controller Developer Installation Supported for SBS

Client OS Unsupported Developer Installation

Dynamic Memory in VMs Unsupported Unsupported

Windows Web Server Unsupported Supported

Versioning Changes
• Shredded Storage
• Versioning Scenario
• 1st file = 10m storage requirement
• 2nd.. 10th = 1m file increase per version storage requirement
Old versioning model
1st = 10m 2nd = 11m 3rd =12m 10th = 19m Total = 145m

Shredded Storage versioning model
1st = 10m 2nd = 1m 3rd =1m 10th = 1m Total = 19m

What does this mean for RBS?

Authentication Modes
• SharePoint 15 continues to offer support for both claims and classic
authentication modes
• However claims authentication is THE default authentication option now
• Classic authentication mode is still there, but can only be managed in PowerShell – it’s
gone from the UI
• Support for classic mode is deprecated and will go away in a future release, so we
recommend moving to Claims
• There also a new process to migrate accounts from Windows classic to
Windows claims

Authentication Migration
• The MigrateUsers method in SharePoint 2010 is no longer the
correct way to migrate accounts – it is now deprecated
• A new cmdlet has been created called Convert-SPWebApplication
• A simple example – you have a Windows classic web application
• Run Convert-SPWebApplication -Identity "http://yourWebapp" -To Claims –
RetainPermissions [-Force]

Other Claims Migration Scenarios
• You have an existing Windows claims application and you want to bring over
content from a SharePoint 2010 Windows classic web app
• Option 1 (the safest):
• Create a web application in o15 that uses Windows classic authentication
• Attach the SharePoint 2010 content database to this o15 web app
• Attaching it will upgrade it to the o15 database format, so verify that it is working correctly
after attach
• Run the Convert-SPWebApplication command on the o15 web app to convert the users from
Windows classic to Windows claims
• Detach the content database from the o15 Windows classic web app
• Attach the content database to it’s final o15 Windows claims web app
• Option 2 (the quickest):
• Attach the content DB to an existing Windows claims web application
• Run the Convert-SPWebApplication cmdlet again on the web app

Authentication Infrastructure
• One of the big improvements is that SharePoint tracks
FedAuth cookies in the new Distributed Cache Service
• In SharePoint 2010 each WFE had its own copy
• That meant that if you got redirected to a different WFE, you
would need to re-authenticate
• This means that sticky sessions are no longer required when
using SAML claims!

New Claims Features
• You can choose the characters for the claim type and there is no
enforcement on the ordering of claim types
• Pre-populate the custom claim types and characters across all farms
• Install the claim providers that use those custom claim types in any order
• You can add multiple token signing certificates to the SharePoint
STS
• Useful in S2S scenarios
• Use the Set-SecurityTokenServiceConfig cmdlet

New Claims Features (continued)
• The SharePoint STS now supports a federation metadata
endpoint
• SharePoint publishes an endpoint describing it’s configuration and
certificates, and can consume the same
• HOWEVER…the format it uses and consumes is JSON, so the trusting
partner must support that (AD FS does not today)
• There is a possibility we will publish guidance on how to develop this for
ADFS
• That would also support multiple token signing certs

Authentication Logging
• There is significantly more logging provided to help troubleshoot
authentication issues. You can see things like:
• Adding / removing FedAuth cookies from the cache
• Where authentication requests get redirected
• Which claims providers were used and which were not
• Reason why a FedAuth cookie failed to be used (i.e. expiration, failure to
decrypt, etc.)

Request Management

Sourced from: http://articles.boston.com/2011-12-23/metro/30545715_1_traffic-cops-holiday-shoppers-christmas-shopping

Request Management (RM)
• The purpose of the Request Management feature is to give
SharePoint knowledge of and more control over incoming
requests
• Having knowledge over the nature of incoming requests – for
example, the user agent, requested URL, or source IP – allows
SharePoint to customize the response to each request
• RM is applied per web app, just like throttling is done in
SharePoint 2010

RM – Goals
• RM can route to WFEs with better health, keeping low-health
WFEs alive
• RM can identify harmful requests and deny them immediately
• RM can prioritize requests by throttling lower-priority ones (bots)
to serve higher-priority ones (end-users)
• RM can send all requests of specific type, like search for example,
to specific machines
• Isolated traffic can help troubleshoot errors on one machine
• RM can send heavy requests to more powerful WFEs

RM Components
Request Manager (RM)
Request Throttling and Routing
Throttle if appropriate, or select which
WFE’s the request may be sent to

Request Prioritization
Filter WFEs to only ones healthy
enough for the request

Request Load Balancing
Select a single WFE to route to, based
on weighting schemes like health

RM Routing and Pools
• Routing rules route requests and are associated with MachinePools
• MachinePools contain servers
• Servers use weights for routing – static weights and health weights
• Static weights are constant for WFEs; health weights change dynamically based on health
scores

Routing Rule #1
Routing Rule #2
Static Weight = 1 Static Weight = 1 …
Health Weight = 4 Health Weight = 4 Routing Rule #n

RM Routing Rules
• Routing to a server in a MachinePool is based on
matching a routing rule
• Routing rules are placed in ExecutionGroups
• These are numbered 0 to 2, with 0 the default
• Rules are evaluated in each ExecutionGroup
• As soon as a match is found no more ExecutionGroups are evaluated
• All machines from pools that match any routing rules are union’ed
together to determine possible target servers
• This means that you create your most important rules in
ExecutionGroup 0

Routing Rules and Execution Groups

Routing Rule #4
Routing Rule #5
Routing Rule #1
Execution Group 1
Routing Rule #2
Match!

X
Routing Rule #6
Routing Rule #3
Execution Group 0
Routing Rule #7
No Match
Execution Group 2

Not Evaluated

RM Routing Rules (cont.)
• There are some important caveats to remember
about routing rules
• If no rules are matched, then the request will be sent
to any server that is NOT in any machine pool for any
rule
• In a one server farm that means nothing will route if
no rules match, so the alternative is to create a “catch
all” rule that matches everything
• Just put it in ExecutionGroup 1 or 2 so it’s the last match

RM Routing Weights
• RM uses static weights and health weights
• Static weights are associated with WFEs so certain ones will always be
favored when selecting.
• This gives added weight to more powerful WFEs and less to weaker
machines
• Health weights are used to even out load and keep “sick” WFEs going
• Health scores run from 0 to 10 where 0 is the healthiest and therefore will
get the most requests; this score is used to derive the health weight
• WFEs start with a healthy weight; the Policy Engine health rule updates
health weights dynamically – you cannot change it manually

RM Scenario – Health Based Routing
• A series of requests come in; one WFE is in poor health, while two
others are in good health. RM evaluates the following:
• Health information: { [WFE1, sick], [WFE2, healthy], [WFE3, healthy] }
• Based on this RM routes most of the requests among WFE2 and
WFE3
• It is still random routing, but greater weight is given to healthier machines
• Alternatively the admin could remove WFE1 from the routing
pool, allow it to complete its requests then return it back to the
pool

New & Retiring Service Applications

What happened to Office Web Apps?
• OWA is now stand alone. It cannot run on a SharePoint Server.
• Why?
• Not all documents are in SharePoint
• Provide unified platform for other applications as well

• Benefits
• Large customers had numerous farms to manage in 2010 time frame
• Consolidation of services to single Office Web Apps farm which provides services for multiple
applications
• Manage scale and performance of Office Web Apps independent of the SharePoint environment
• Easier upgrade and maintenance for Office Web Apps functionality
• Easier consuming of Office Web Apps functionalities without complex SharePoint
federation
• Easier to setup also without SharePoint – if only used for example with Exchange
• Scalability with OWA “Farms”

New Replacement for Web Analytics Service
• The Analytics Platform replaces the Web Analytics service application
• Some of the reasons for that included:
• There was no concept of item-to-item recommendations based on user behavior, i.e.
people who viewed this also viewed foo
• Couldn’t promote search results based on an item’s popularity (as determined by # of
times an item was viewed)
• It required a very powerful SQL box and significant storage and IO
• Lists don’t have explicit view counts
• The architecture could have problems scaling to large numbers

How the New Platform Improves on Analytics
• The new Analytics Processing engine aims to solve these issues:
• Find relevant information (improve search relevance) – based on views, click
thru, etc.
• See what others are looking at (“hot” indicators and usage numbers – i.e.
what’s popular based on # of views as well as # of unique users to view)
• Understand how much content is being used (i.e. viewed) and how it compares
to other documents
• See discussion thread usage and find the hot topics
• Use this popularity info to populate views through the Content by Search (CBS)
WebPart
• The model is extensible for 3rd parties to build into the platform

Processing and Storing Analytics Data
• Data goes through an analysis and reporting process that is contained
within the search service application
• Things like views and counts are combined with click-thru and other
search metrics and pushed into the reporting database
• Some data like view counts are also pushed into the index so it can be
included in search results, sorted on (i.e. what’s most viewed), etc.
• An analytics processing job examines data for clicks, links, tags, etc., as
well as the usage data to create the data points used for reporting

Analytics System Components
• The Analytics system can be considered as five parts:
• Event: Each item comes into the system as an event with certain
parameters
• Filtering & Normalization: Each event is looked at to see:
• Special Handling: Certain types of events will be directly written to the
.usage files
• Filtered Out: Some events like those from robots, should not be counted
and allowed to pass
• Normalized: Rewritten so it can be counted along with other hit types. E.g.
document reads through the WAC should be counted as reads against the
document
• Allowed to Pass: So that normal counting methods can be performed

Analytics System Components (cont.)
• Custom Events: You can configure up to 12 custom
events in addition to what comes OOB
• Calculation: We run calculations to sum or average
across events
• Reports: A number of default reports are available,
including:
• Top queries
• Most popular documents in a library or site
• Historic usage of an item – view counts for last recent
history as well as all time

Access Services
• Good news: the old Access Services 2010 Service App is still here

• Better news: the new Access Services 2013 Service App is here

• The horrifying news: how Access Services 2013 management is done

Manageability
SharePoint SQL

Service applications in SharePoint 2013
• New service applications available and
improvements on existing ones

• Office Web Apps is no longer a service
application

• Web Analytics is no longer service application,
it’s part of search

New Cache Service
• A new Windows service – the AppFabric Caching Service – is installed
on each server in the farm when SharePoint is installed
• It is managed via the Services on Server page in central admin as the
Distributed Cache service
• The config DB keeps track of
which machines in the farm
are running the cache service

Cache Setup
• The farm account is used as service account for Cache Service
• Like user profile service in SharePoint 2010, during setup the
service account should have elevated privileges (i.e. local admin)
• After setup is complete you should lower the privileges for the
account

Cache Architecture
• For caching in farm, scale points have not been determined yet
• How many servers are needed, what resources should be built out (CPU,
memory, etc.)
• More data will be available after Beta 2

Cache Server Performance
• There are hundred(s) of perf counters; there are also counts
exposed via developer’s dashboard
• # of reads
• # of writes
• # of hits
• # of misses
• time for read
• time for write
• Total I/O (how much data has been transferred in a given period of time)

Cache Service Health
• The following health rules have been created to help you track the Cache
Service (look in the Availability section for most):
• One of the cache hosts in the cluster is down (Availability)
• Firewall client settings on the cache host are incorrect (Configuration)
• Cache host is in throttled state (Availability)
• The high availability node for SharePoint distributed cache is not available
(Availability) – happens when there are less than 2 servers running the cache service
• There exists at least one cache host in the cluster, which SP doesn't know about
(Configuration) – happens when the cache service is disabled in SharePoint but
AppFabricCaching Service is running on the machine
• Cached objects have been evicted (Configuration) – indicates eviction happened
across the cache cluster. Not bad in and of itself but may be a clue if it happens
frequently and/or there are perf issues

SharePoint 2013 ECM - Big Bets

Internet Business eDiscovery Team Folders

• Major WCM • In place preservation • Work on mail and
Investment in SP & Exchange documents together
• Search Driven Sites • Integrated, enterprise • SharePoint, Outlook,
• Intranet and Internet wide case OWA
applicability management • Retention/compliance
across stores

Central Place to view all Cases

Add, manage and export discovery sets

Site Based Compliance & preservation
• Compliance officers create policies, which
define:
• The retention policy for the entire site and
the team mailbox, if one is associated with
the site.
• What causes a project to be closed.
• When a project should expire
• Can set also site collection as read only
• Policy also available optionally from self
site creation
• Policies can be replicated from content
type hub cross enterprises

The Team Folders – Exchange and SP
together • Documents are stored in
SharePoint
• Emails are stored in Exchange
• Team Folders can receive
emails and have their own
email address
• Easy access to both from
Outlook and SharePoint
• Unified compliance policy
applies to both

Unified Discovery across Exchange, SharePoint
and Lync
• Find it all in one place (unified console)
• Find more (in-place discovery returns the richest data)
• Find it without impacting the user (Give legal team discovery, leave IWs alone)
Discovery Center in SharePoint Unified Preserve, Search and Export

Exchange Web Services Connect to Exchange to get mailbox data
Lync Archiving to Exchange Exchange is the compliance store for Lync

Search Infrastructure Exchange and SharePoint use the same search platform

Search
• New Search architecture
with one unified search

• Personalized search results
based on search history

• Rich contextual previews

Search UI Configuration
• Result Types
• Display Templates
• Search Navigation
• Search Refinement
• Query Suggestions
• Thumbnail Previews
• Site Level Search Admin Summary

Faceted Navigation with Search Refiners

Business Intelligence
• Excel BI
• Instant analysis through In Memory BI
Engine
• Power View Add-in

• Excel Services
• Improved data exploration
• Field List and Field Well Support
• Calculated Measures and Members
• Enhanced Timeline Controls

Business Intelligence
• PerformancePoint Services
• Filter enhancements and Filter search
• Dashboard migration
• Support for Analysis Services Effective
User
• Visio Services
• Refresh data from external sources –
BCS and Azure SQL
• Supports comments on Visio Drawings
• Maximum Cache Size service parameter
• Health Analyzer Rules to report on
Maximum Cache Size

Jason’s favorite new feature…

Introduction
• Business challenge
• It is challenging for information workers to get a comprehensive view of their tasks or to
have a central point for managing their work.
• Tasks are stored across applications and systems, and even in the case where all tasks
are stored within a single system, information can still be scattered.

• Work management Service applications provides functionality to aggregate
tasks to central place
• Users can go to view and track their work and to-dos
• Tasks cached to person’s my site

Tasks - Architecture

animated

Technical background and configuration
• Service application doesn’t have any configuration options in Central
Administration
• Accessed and used directly programmatically by out of the box functionalities

• Out of the box task aggregation with Microsoft SharePoint Products,
Microsoft Exchange Server, and Microsoft Project Server
• Example, users can edit tasks from Exchange Server on a mobile phone, and the
Work Management Service aggregates tasks to the My tasks SharePoint list.

• Implementation is based on provider model, so that additional systems
maybe integrated to same architecture in future

Handy information
• Jason’s info
• http://www.sharepointlonghorn.com
• jase@sharepointlonghorn.com
• @sharepointlhorn

• This Deck is available now at http://bit.ly/itproredpill
• SharePoint 2013 Presentation: ITPro training
• http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=30361

• Wictor Wilen
• Claims Auth: http://www.wictorwilen.se/sharepoint-2013-claims-is-the-new-black

• Spencer Harbar
• Request Manager: http://www.harbar.net/articles/sp2013rm1.aspx

• Dan Holme
• Shredded Storage: http://bit.ly/dh-shred

• Andrew Connell
• Setup Guide for Devs: http://bit.ly/ac-devsetup2013

• Todd Klindt
• http://www.toddklindt.com/blog
• SPC 2012 shtuff: http://www.toddklindt.com/spc2012
• Weekly Netcast: http://www.stickam.com/toddklindt

ITPro's taking the SharePoint 2013 red pill

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

Destaque (16)

Mais de Jason Himmelstein

Mais de Jason Himmelstein (20)

Último

Último (20)

ITPro's taking the SharePoint 2013 red pill