none
Project Server Storing Non Project Related Content RRS feed

  • Question

  • Just started a new job with a large organization (1k+ users) that decided to store non project related content in a single Project Server 2010 instance site collection instead of a separate SharePoint site collection(s). Personally I believe it's a poor decision that constrains future growth (site collection size limitations) and access to content (licensing) while providing no substantial benefit.

    Anyone have thoughts or opinions on this choice? Any sources to support either path?


    Jay W. Ahearn PMP, MCP




    Monday, October 27, 2014 5:43 PM

All replies

  • Hello,

    How much data are we talking about that is not Project related?

    Paul


    Paul Mather | Twitter | http://pwmather.wordpress.com | CPS

    Monday, October 27, 2014 7:45 PM
    Moderator
  • I would create a new site collection for the non-project SharePoint sites.   Also, keep in mind that project server requires enterprise SharePoint license and that could get costly.   If you want to keep license cost done, I would create a new farm using SharePoint Foundation (the SharePoint version that is free) if you are only storing documents.

    Cheers!


    Michael Wharton, MVP, MBA, PMP, MCT, MCTS, MCSD, MCSE+I, MCDBA
    Website http://www.WhartonComputer.com
    Blog http://MyProjectExpert.com contains my field notes and SQL queries

    Monday, October 27, 2014 7:54 PM
    Moderator
  • Thanks for the information!

    At this time, I dont have good feel yet for the size of the data. However we are in the process of implementing a KM initiative as well as a PMO like organization.If they both take off it could mean large quantity of various files and various file sizes.

    My concern with licensing relates to the CALs required for Project Server. Our entire enterprise has SharePoint Enterprise CALs. If we want everyone in the organization to access the sites in the Project Server instance, they all need an additional CAL.


    Jay W. Ahearn, PMP, MCP

    Monday, October 27, 2014 11:01 PM
  • Hi Jay,

    I would go with separate site collection (as you suggested) and make sure the additional site collection(s) will use a separate content database. Maybe this can be enhanced by a better navigation between the site collections (e.g. top navigation bar) and a better Search configuration so the user won't even notice it is a different site collection (unless they will not have access to one/some/all areas)?

    Paul

    Tuesday, October 28, 2014 1:05 PM