Importing sandbox without .pj file

[vjadhav-4]

How do i import sandbox in Integrity build 10.9? I know project.pj files no longer exists in this version but since I need to import a sandbox which is created by different MKS user in same machine

[gkandurwar-2]

In Integrity 10.9 shared sandbox is discarded.

So can not import sandbox created by some other user

[KaelLizak]

Hello VISHWAJIT JADHAV‌,

Gaurav Kandurwar‌ is mostlycorrect:  Only the sandbox creator can convert a registered sandbox from pre-10.8 to 10.8+.  The gesture menu --> Sandbox --> Import... still exists (although you will likely have to modify your viewset to see it), as does the CLI command si importsandbox.  In your case, VISHWAJIT JADHAV‌, you're out of luck.  This was deemed acceptable, because the use of a shared sandbox for multiple users was never a recommended practice, and that never been fully supported for that use.

Kind Regards,

Kael

[kthierer]

An interesting side question for me:

Provided only the server destination is reconctructable/guessable one could have the "smart" idea

to recreate the sandbox without populating and copy the content from the old sandbox location.

What would be the side effects of such a procedure?

Regarding at least:

- working revisions

- deferred operations

- danger of pseudo diffs

- danger of pseudo snycs

[KaelLizak]

Hello Klaus Thierer‌!

That's certainly an Idea worthy of consideration.  Unless you're involving a human element, the "guessable" option is very open with a post ILM 10.8 sandbox:

• Pre-10.8, the server information is in the project.pj file, along with the project location, so this is pretty much trivial
• Post-10.8, the server information is stored in the client-side database:
  • If the client has that information in its database (in other words: if the client database doesn't just delete entries relating to dropped sandboxes), then it's probably pretty easy, but that seems unlikely, due to wanting to keep the client database as small as possible.
  • If the client doesn't have that information, it could try to look things up based on members in the project.  Off the top of my head it could do this by comparing member names, then comparing the content of those member revisions.  The drawbacks are if it's an old sandbox, it won't find it on:
    • A breadth-first search, because there will (presumably) be substantial changes in members and revision contents
    • A depth-first search, because it will go drilling down too far.
  • We could probably tailor the search based on intelligently looking at the oldest created date on the files, and using a revision older than that as the basis to check against, which should prune the search tree substantially for older sandboxes.
  • I'm sure there are lots of intelligent optimizations I'm not thinking of at the moment.

Basically, I can see this being useful, and I can see lots of problems with it off the top of my head, but I can also think of ways to work around some of those problems, and I don't work with that code, so I'm confident there are lots of things I can't think of involved here as well.  I would definitely support you in requesting this Idea as a valid Idea, I just don't know how much effort would actually be involved.

-Kael

[kthierer]

Well my brain also starts storming imagining I would have to implement a general directory- to project matcher wizard

(especially when I think of shared projects, variants ...)

For VISHWAJIT JADHAV it might be an option to ask that user to log in

and use the cli command

  si sandboxes > USERX_SandBoxes.txt

to improve the guessability

A manual countermeasure to improve guessability for future might be to generate a  USERX_Sanboxes.txt

periodically and check it in in a special project.

Anyhow it would be better to drastically reduce the probability stumbling in this use case.

As for Ideas: Some wishful thinking for the coming ILM 11.1 would be:

I would like to see the client database rather being a distributed database in the sense

of each toplevel directory of a sandbox should contain a .mks\clientdb directory.

Then there could be enough information for a restore scenario within the sandbox.

The registered top level sandboxes could still be kept in %USERPROFILEDIR%\.mks\clientdb.

regards Jürgen

[vjadhav-4]

Thanks Kael for the information.

[LLawton]

After having upgraded to 10.9 we discovered that PTC had dropped support for shared sandboxes without consulting the user community.

We have these two use cases:

1) Testing machine: One computer shared by many users

A computer designed to test software is used by many users (always one at a time). Sandboxes are set up in known locations required for testing and resynchronized as needed (re-creating takes much longer for WAN issues).

2) Development and test: Multiple computers for one user

A developer has a development machine in one location and a test machine in another location. Both computers share a sandbox on a network drive so the developer can go back and forth with the same work context.

Our current solution is to have people in this situation use the 10.7 client.

PTC told me they are working on a way to transfer a sandbox from one user to another. If they still are, it will probably come out late this year.

In the meantime, I've started testing this possible solution: under your ".mks" user folder, there is a "clientdb" folder. It contains the client-side sandbox database.

I moved the whole folder from one computer to another and when I opened my client, my sandboxes were all there. Please note: I use a shared drive for my physical sandboxes where the files are, otherwise that wouldn't work. My next test will be to move it to a different user profile on the same computer.

You might want to try that, but be careful: it's unsupported, of course.

Keep us posted if you do.

[spartridge]

The ability to export and import sandboxes is a new feature that will be available in 11.1. The release date is in March!!!

[ssaul]

That's great news!

Is this taken from some kind of official roadmap?

[KaelLizak]

Hi Stephan‌,

I'll talk to Steve tomorrow, and see what I can find out for you.

Cheers!

-Kael

2017-02-14EST1624: Fixed spelling mistake

[KaelLizak]

Hello Stephan Saul‌,

That was taken from the feature list of Integrity Lifecycle Manager 11.1.  That's scheduled for release in March 2017.

Cheers!

-Kael

[ssaul]

Hi Kael Lizak‌,

thanks for the info.

But - the schedule does only show schedules, no features, right?

Are the features available, too?

Regards, Stephan

[KaelLizak]

Stephan Saul‌,

The features aren't typically public until the actual release.  If there's a feature your organization would really like to keep track of, your Account Manager should be able to give you that information.

-Kael

[vjadhav-4]

Thanks Steve for that great news. Awaiting the feature

[khoppe]

Does exist any possibility for me as customer to access infos about Integrity Roadmap like visible in your posting?
(Not only next release but for eg. plan for next 4 releases?)

-Klaus

[ssaul]

See Kael's post 2 above:

"The features aren't typically public until the actual release.  If there's a feature your organization would really like to keep track of, your Account Manager should be able to give you that information."

Not what I would see as customer-oriented...