locked
Migrating our SCCM v1606 Server, Which Route to Take? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hello all,

    I have been researching a way to move our current SCCM environment for quite some time now. 

    Let me describe our current environment:

    SCCM 2012 v1606 server with a remote SQL database on a seperate SQL server. WSUS is not integrated.

    I currently want to move the environment to one SCCM server with SQL 2014 installed on a physical box. 

    To my understanding, there are 3 options I could take. I simply want to know, which one is the fastest, easiest, and most efficient way to do it? One of the options is already eliminated in my mind, and that is the back and restore route: 

    https://www.anoopcnair.com/how-to-migrate-sccm-cb-1606-primary-server-to-new-hardware-or-new-virtual-server/

    If we went this route, we would have to rename our new SCCM box to the same name as the current box, which we don't want to do.

    That leaves these two options: 

    https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/configurationmgr/2013/04/02/how-to-move-the-configmgr-2012-site-database-to-a-new-sql-server/

    vs

    https://www.systemcenterdudes.com/step-by-step-sccm-1606-upgrade-guide/

    WHICH ONE OF THESE IS EASIER?? and which one would most people recommend? 

    Thanks.


    Saturday, September 30, 2017 9:23 PM

Answers

  • > "we would have to rename our new SCCM box to the same name as the current box, which we don't want to do."

    Why? You'd rather do more work and introduce more complexity just because you don't want to keep a meaningless name? 

    A backup and restore is easiest and the least amount of work.

    Also, on a semantic note, 1606 is not a version of ConfigMgr/SCCM 2012, it is a version of ConfigMgr Current Branch (CB).


    Jason | https://home.configmgrftw.com | @jasonsandys

    • Marked as answer by MikeyB202 Monday, October 23, 2017 8:12 PM
    Saturday, September 30, 2017 10:43 PM

All replies

  • > "we would have to rename our new SCCM box to the same name as the current box, which we don't want to do."

    Why? You'd rather do more work and introduce more complexity just because you don't want to keep a meaningless name? 

    A backup and restore is easiest and the least amount of work.

    Also, on a semantic note, 1606 is not a version of ConfigMgr/SCCM 2012, it is a version of ConfigMgr Current Branch (CB).


    Jason | https://home.configmgrftw.com | @jasonsandys

    • Marked as answer by MikeyB202 Monday, October 23, 2017 8:12 PM
    Saturday, September 30, 2017 10:43 PM
  • It's actually not my choice, our network admin and the VP of technology decided that we needed a new naming convention and get rid of the old one with attrition of old machines.

    I would definitely welcome just going the backup and restore route, but it is not my choice. 

    Saturday, September 30, 2017 11:21 PM
  • On another note, it actually seems like just moving the database would be the best route to go. But in that guide that I linked it doesn't say anything about moving the SCCM console, just the SQL database. Would that scenerio just be used in the case of just moving a DB and not doing anything with the actual SCCM install?
    Saturday, September 30, 2017 11:22 PM