Testing for BI & DWH

Since ever testing is part of every IT project plan – that’s true as well for Business Intelligence (BI) & Data Warehouse (DWH) projects. The practical implementation of testing in the BI / DWH environment has confronted me with troubles in the past again and again. Often I’ve had the impression that the BI / DWH world is still back in the Stone Age regarding development processes and environments. At least it is significantly behind the maturity level I know from the software engineering domain. The below chart illustrates this gap:

rbra_testing1 (1)

Cultural differences between the software development and BI community (Source: http://agiledata.org/essays/culturalImpedanceMismatch.html)

If there is something tested at all, typically in the BI frontend area things are tested manually. In the DWH backend we see – besides manual tests – self coded test routines, e.g. in the form of stored procedures or dedicated ETL jobs. However the integration into a test case management tool and systematic evaluation of the test results doesn’t happen. This is heavily contrasting with the software engineering domain where automated regression testing combined with modern development approaches like test driven design are applied. At least for some time we find first inputs regarding BI specific testing (cf. the (German) TDWI book here). Concepts and paper are patient though. Where are we with regard to a possible tool support, namely for the area of regression tests?

Since summer 2014 we at IT-Logix are actively looking for better (tool based) solutions for BI specific testing. We do this together with the Austrian company Tricentis. Tricentis develops the Tosca product suite, one of the worldwide leading software solutions for test automation. In a first step we run a proof of concept (POC) for regression tests for BI frontend artefacts, namely typical reports. One of the architectural decisions was to use Excel and PDF export files as a base for our tests. With this choice of a generic file interface the efforts to develop BI product specific tests were omitted. And this way we reduced the implementation effort to about two days in the POC. The goal was to run “Before-After” tests in batch mode. We took 20 reports for the POC case (these were actually SAP BusinessObjects Web Intelligence reports, but you can imagine whatever tool you like as long as you can export to PDF and / or Excel). A current version of the PDF or Excel output of the report is compared with a corresponding reference file. Typical real life situations where you can use this scenario are:

  • recurringly scheduled regression tests to monitor side effects of ongoing DWH changes: The reference files are created somewhen e.g. after a successful release of the DWH. Imagine there are ongoing change requests on the level of your DWH. Then you want to make sure these changes only impact the reports where a change is expected. To make sure all the rest of your reports aren’t concerned by any side effects, you now run your regression tests e.g. every weekend and compare the hereby produced files with the reference files.
  • BI platform migration projects: If you run a migration project for example to migrate your SAP BusinessObjects XI 3.1 installation to 4.1, you’ll want to make sure reports still work and look the same in 4.1 as they did in XI 3.1. In this case you create the reference files in XI 3.1 and compare them with the ones from 4.1. (As the export drivers vary between the two versions, especially the Excel exports are not very useful for this use case. Still, PDF worked pretty fine in my experience)
  • Database migration projects: If you run a database migration project for example migrating all your Oracle databases to Teradata or SAP HANA, then you want to make sure all of your reports show still the correct data (or at least the data as was shown with the original datasource…)
rbra_testing1 (3)

Sample configuration of a test case template using the GUI of Tosca (Source: IT-Logix POC)

Tosca searches for the differences between the two files. For Excel this happens on a cell by cell basis, for PDF we used a text based approach as well as an image compare approach.

rbra_testing1 (2)

Depending on the chosen test mode the differences can be visualized differently (Source: IT-Logix POC)

Using the solution implemented during the POC we could see very quickly which reports were different in their current state compared to the reference state.

Another important aspect of the POC was the scalability of the solution approach as I work primarily with (large) enterprise customers. If I have not only 20 but hundreds of reports (and therefore test cases), I have to prioritize and manage the creation, execution and error analysis of these test cases somehow. Tosca helps with the feature to model business requirements and to connect them with the test cases. Based on that we can derive and report classical test metrics like test case coverage or test execution rate.

rbra_testing1 (1)

Requirements and test cases are tightly related (Source: IT-Logix POC)

In my eyes an infrastructure like Tosca is a basic requirement to systematically increase and keep the quality in BI / DWH systems. In addition advanced methods like test driven development are only adaptable to BI / DWH undertakings if the necessary infrastructure for test automation is available.

In this blog post I’ve shown a first, rudimentary solution for regression tests for BI frontend tools. In a next article I’ll show the possibilities to implement regression test for DWH backend components.

Event recommendation: Learn about a real life scenario to run a SAP BusinessObjects migration project in an agile manner. Hence test automation is key and explained in some more details. Join me during sapInsider’s BI2015 at Nice by mid of June. Find more information here.

(This blog post was first published by me in German here)

Advertisements

How to speed up connection between Translation Manager, Universe Designer and CMS

At a recent customer project my teammate and I were facing an issue with importing Webi documents and universes into Translation Manager (all on BO4.1 SP4) getting the following error message:

org.apache.axis2.AxisFault: Unable to find servers in CMS, servers could be down or disabled by the administrator (FWN 01014)

There is a KB article describing this error and a solution: http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1879675

One hand we followed the instructions in the KB article and specified the hostname for each server. Although our server is multihomed (that means has more than one network interfaces) we didn’t thought about this before hand because the second network interface goes into a backup LAN and is never used for communication with e.g. the client tools. In addition everything worked fine so far – until we got the issue with Translation Manager. Still, just setting the hostname was not enough. On the server side there is the Windows firewall enabled, therefore we had to assign static request ports to several services. We already did so before our issue with the Translation Manager for the CMS, Input & Output FRS, all Webi Processing Server. We used TCPView to analyze on which ports Translation Manager was opening connections. As long as there were requests on ports which we didn’t specify in the CMC (some random port number e.g. 56487) we narrowed down all the services which Translation Manager establishes a connection. We had to specify a port for all of the following servers:

  • The Adaptive Processing Server (APS) hosting the DSL-Bridge Service
  • The APS hosting the Client Auditing Proxy Service
  • The APS hosting the Search Index Service
  • The APS hosting the Translation Service
  • The WACS (Web Application Container Server)

Besides the issue with Translation Manager we had another issue with creating new universe connections in the Universe Design Tool. When creating a new connection we had to wait up to 30 minutes ( ! ) to get to the wizard page where you can select from the list of available database drivers. Still, after 30 minutes everything worked fine and could create the connection successfully. Based on our experience with Translation Manager we run again TCPView and found that we need to assign a port number to both connection servers (32 and 64 bit) in CMC. Having done this, creating a new connection now works without any waiting time.

After all: If you have firewalls between your BO server and client tools, just assign a port to all servers available and open the port on the firewall (the only exception might be for the Event Server as I’m really not aware of any communication between this server and a component outside the BO server)

The bug paradox: When fixing the bug leads to wrong reports

My workmate Christoph Gnodtke wrote an excellent blog about how to identify SAP BusinessObjects Web Intelligence reports which are impacted by various calculation changes in newer BO versions. What I would like to point out here is that not only BO 4.x migrations are concerend but also “simple” service / support package upgrades e.g. from XI 3.1 SP2 to SP6. In my current customer case we’ve found many many reports which obviously were created in a wrong way, namely that the table structure contains the merged dimension (e.g. [Merged Country]) where as the cells within the row use a variable containing e.g. a Where operator using the original dimension ([Query1].[Country]). In our case the business requirement would have been to use the merged dimension here as well. As outlined here, in former BO support package levels a bug resulted in the effect, that the just mentioned example still showed what the business expected. Now (e.g. in XI 3.1 SP6) that the bug is fixed, the reports start to show wrong values. Although the software 360Eyes doesn’t solve the problem, it at least helps to identify concerned reports. Unfortunately we still need to look into every single report and compare between the version running on the XI 3.1 SP2 environment and the SP6 environment. In order to speed up this process we use 360Cast. This software provides similar features like BO Publications e.g. for report scheduling and bursting. The main advantage namely in the case of report testing are two fold (compared to BO out of the box features):

  1. Report selection for a schedule job can be done using good old BO categories. That means you can assign e.g. a test category to all reports you want to test in one single run. In our customer case we use categories for each data mart. In 360Cast, instead of choosing every single report individually, we just choose to select all reports of this test category.
    CategorySelection
    In order to run all these reports with one single click there is just one thing missing: Providing all the necessary prompt values, often the same values for the same prompts (like Year) over many reports. This is where the second advantage comes into play:
  2. To provide prompt values 360Cast accepts both manual input values (where a value can be applied to a all prompts with the same name) but also values from an Excel sheet (or even from an SQL query). We usually use the Excel alternative. Based on this we can easily vary input parameters for different test purporses by simply using another Excel sheet. In addition we can specify the export format and the recipients, e.g. by providing an email address.
    PromptSettingMapping
    (The values in the drop down menues correspond to the columns in the underlying Excel spreadsheet)

After all, also 360Cast doesn’t solve the initial problem. But at least we don’t need to run every report (identified by 360Eyes earlier) on its own but can automate the refresh process and we can easily rerun reports (e.g. with different prompts by simply modifying the values in the Excel list).

Issue with Null Filters prior to Webi XI 3.1 SP6.3

After some more “theoretical” blog posts back in 2013 I’d like to start the new year with a short technical contribution. As some of you may know I’m trying to upgrade the BO XI 3.1 SP2.7 environment of one of our major customers to XI 3.1 SP6. This is sort of a painful experience as we are working on it since more than 12 months now. Still, there is some light at the horizon as back in December Fixpack 6.3 was released which contains an important bug fix. Not to mention that the bug wasn’t yet there in SP2.7 but was introduced somewhen between SP3 and SP6. The issue is referenced in the SAP KB1897777 and it seems to be fixed now.

What is our situation? We have Webi reports containing containing multiple queries and merged dimensions. If we use dimensions from two different queries in the same table, variables as well as filters containing “IsNull” functions do not work properly.

Here we are with the report in XI 3.1 SP2.7:

SP27

Now the result in SP6 (prior to Fixpack 6.3):

SP61

… and finally how it looks like with Fixpack 6.3 applied:

SP63

The tricky part was to detect this error (the above screenshots are very simplified tables for debugging purposes). Obviously even our business users didn’t caught this at first sight. Therefore I’m glad if I can contribute that you double check this if you are on a lower version than Fixpack 6.3. On the other hand: Please let me know if you find other (newly introduced) bugs in FP6.3…

And by the way: Happy New Year and lot’s of fun in the Business Intelligence world 😉

How to promote a Crystal Reports with Dynamic Cascading Prompts in BI4

This (and most probably some future) blog post will detail on my experience using Promotion Management (LCM) in BusinessObjects release 4.0. The following explanations are mostly based on the description I’ve just handed in to SAP support. I will do my best to keep this post current regarding answers from SAP support…
Infrastructure: I did all my testes on Cloudshare (see my blog here). Currently using BI 4.0 SP4 Patch 4.

Source-Sytem: Cloudsrv012
Target-System: Cloudsrv016

Promotion Management is primarily used on the Source System.

Update from SAP support

SAP support was quite quick and told me that the issue described in this post will be fixed in patch 4.7 (including the problem of promoting BusinessViews residing in subfolders)

Terms

Dynamic Cascading Prompt (DCP): A parameter object in Crystal Reports 2011 which contains a dynamic list of value (LOV).

List of Value (LOV): List of Value object based on a Business View (BV). Can be created manually in the BV-Manager.

Business View (BV): Business View’s are created in the BV-Manager (which is part of the Client Tools setup of the BI Platform). BusinessViews are based on Business Elements. Business Elements are based on Data Foundation objects. And Data Foundation Objects are based on Data Connection objects. These items are generally considerd as “Repository Objects” (at least in XI 3.1 Import Wizard this was the case).

Initial Setup

Create a LOV with its underlying BVs based on the Xtreme database (using ODBC-Connection to local Access file). Save them in a subfolder (in my example “rbra_Test”):

Create a simple Crystal Report (in CR 2011) containing a parameter with a DCP:

Save this report in the source system. In the BI Launchpad the parameter looks like this:

Problem Description

Goal: Simply promote the above created report from source to target system using promotion management.

Steps taken:

Create new promotion job in Source System including all dependencies:

Then promote:

Result: Partial Success:

My guess: The problem is that the BV-objects are in a subfolder. Therefore, I move the BV-objects in source system to root folder:

Report still works in source system:

Take the same Promotion Job as before and refresh dependencies – no Sub Folder in Business View Branch is shown anymore:

Promote again:

^

Now it shows Success:

It looks like a success in BV Manager too:

and also in Crystal Reports:

BUT: If you open report in BI Launchpad, you don’t see any List of Values:

Tested Workarounds

Promote BusinessViews separately (not working)

I tried to promote BusinessViews and LOV objects separately from the report. I have the same issue regarding storing repository objects in subfolders. Besides this I found the following:

  • Just promoting the BusinessView and underlying objects works fine according to Promotion Management. But if you look into BV-Manager you’ll get errors like this
  • Promotion Management doesn’t allow to select LOV objects separately.
  • If you then promote the same Crystal Reports containing the DCP but do NOT select the dependencies, all the BusinessView objects (and LOV objects) are promoted anyway and break the functioning of the BusinessView and LOV in the target system. Currently we couldn’t find a way to promote a Crystal Reports with DCP without automatically promoting all dependencies and therefore break the target system.

Remove DCP, export / import LOV using BV-Manager (not working)

In order to escape the circumstance that Promotion Management automatically promotes DCP objects etc. (see point above) I tried the following:

  • In the source system, set the Crystal Reports parameter to a Static list of value and save the report.
  • Promote it – no repository objects are promoted.
  • In order to “promote” LOV objects independent from report we used the option to export BV and LOV definitions in the BusinessView Manager.
  • We imported the LOV object into the target system using the import option of the BusinessView Manager.
  • Reset the static prompt to the imported LOV.
  • Result:

    The LOV of the second level doesn’t work.

Remove DCP, export / import BV, recreate LOV (working)

  • In the source system, set the Crystal Reports parameter to a Static list of value and save the report.
  • Promote it – no repository objects are promoted.
  • Promote BusinessView only using export / import in BusinessView Manager
    Using Promotion Management doesn’t work properly! (see errors in BV-Manager above)
  • Recreate LOV objects manually in target system
  • Reset the static prompt to the newly created LOV.

Although this is NOT what I expect from SAP in terms of a properly working software – at least these final steps lead to a working solution without too much of manual recreation of repository and report objects!

For all SAP internal guys if you want to track (and support me ;-): The message number with the same case description as above is 971741 / 2012. I will open up some more cases as the things shown above is just the top of the iceberg of what doesn’t work properly in Promotion Management.

Desktop Intelligence to connect again to BO 4.1

Let me share an interesting finding with you, especially those who were not attending the recent SAP BO User Conference in Orlando. When I first saw the following pic I thought this must be another joke about Deski:

(Source: pic.twitter.com/Wckjr4HX)

During the recent BO user conference (the BusinessObjects Arbeitskreis / BOAK) hosted by IT-Logix in Zurich / Switzerland I mentioned this and got numerous requests to look for more details. Obviously many of Swiss BOBJ customers still use Deski and it is quite a show stopper to them regarding any upcoming migration to BO 4. Yet this morning Blair Wheadon from SAP confirmed the slide above was no joke but serious:

As you can see the Desktop Intelligence Compatibility Pack (DCP) should be available in BO 4.1, the next minor release (don’t confuse this with patch 4.1 which equals to BO 4.0.4.1). So far I couldn’t find any rumours when BO 4.1 will be available. Feel free to write your estimation by adding a comment!

Update: I’ve just found more information here:

scn.sap.com/docs/DOC-31798

Great thoughts by Eric Vallo here: bit.ly/NEi3b9

Backup & Recovery in BO 4.x

This post is dedicated to the available means of backup & recovery in SAP BusinessObjects BI 4.x. There are several changes compared to the previous version XI 3.1 including some literally missing functionality.

The recovery scenario: Partial restore of report and universe objects

In my eyes the typical recovery scneario is a partial restore. It happens quite quickly that you either delete a folder with a whole bunch of reports or that you want to revert a change in a report or universe development. Especially if we consider the ad-hoc reporting capabilities of Web Intelligence you probably don’t have a local copy of the corresponding report. In addition people which do any mistake leading to a recovery procedure tend to notice that they did such a mistake only with a certain gap in time, this means they request the recovery e.g. of a given folder not immediately after its deletion but perhaps two weeks later when they realize they deleted some reports too much. In the meanwhile the system might have been used heavily, that’s why a full recovery of the system itself is not really an option. What you need in such a situation is the possibility to recover only selected objects from a backup set to the original system. In this blog I will concentrate on this scenario. I use “original” system as a term to identify the system on which I take the backup and to which I want to recover something back.

The available possibilities in BO 4.x

There are three major approaches in taking a backup of BO 4.x and recover partial content:

  1. Create some kind of BIAR file (multiple options available, see below) and try to recover selected elements back to the original system.
  2. Do a full backup, restore the full backup to a separate BO “recovery” system and finally use LCM to “promote” selected objects back to the original system.
  3. Use a professional backup & recovery solution like 360Plus from GB and Smith

Let me evaluate the above approaches in the next few sections.

The BIAR approach

The BO Admin Guide states in section 12.1.1.3 (page 466):

It is recommended that you use the Lifecycle management console for SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence platform to regularly back up your Business Intelligence content, such as reports, users and groups, and universes. Having current backups of your content makes it possible to restore your Business Intelligence without having to restore your entire system or your server settings.

Whoever wrote this sentence at SAP doesn’t seem to have either any concrete experience with LCM or not a clear idea what a backup & recovery tool should fullfifl in practice. Respectively let’s have a look at just any given freeware to backup your Windows files. Therefore to point this out right at the beginning: Keep your hands off in trusting LCM as your one and only backup solution for BO. LCM is a tool to promote (or in the SAP jargon ‘transport’) objects from one environment to another. LCM was never made to be a backup solution. Let me explain in some more details:

The preferred way to take a backup using LCM is exporting a LCM job into a LCMBIAR file. Finally with FP3 / SP04 you can now schedule the export to such a file. But there are some critical short comings with this (as of SP04 Patch 1; anyone having differing experience with a higher patch level please comment below!):

  • reimporting the LCMBIAR file to the original system on which you created the file will fail as soon as you delete the original LCM job. What real backup solution makes itself depending on the job object creating the backup set?
  • whenever you import a BIAR file you don’t have an option to select / unselect objects to restore. There is only black or white: Either you import all the contents from your (LCM)BIAR file or nothing.
  • LCMBIAR files do not save your successful instances. Only recurring instances are backed up. But by the way you cannot decide whether to restore recurring instances or not, as mentioned before you have to restore everything belonging to the BIAR file.

A next approach in using BIAR files is to use the new Upgrade Management Tool or the “legacy” biarengine.jar. The good news here are that LCM finally is capable to import regular BIAR files which were created by these two means. The following things should be considered:

  • In contrast to LCMBIAR files, regular BIAR files can be imported without any dependancy to any LCM job.
  • The Upgrade Management Tool as well as the biarengine.jar takes a backup of both, recurring as well as successful report instances.
  • Unfortunately SAP was so stupid – sorry to say it like this, but I couldn’t find any other term to express my feelings about this situation – to remove (or just not allow…) the possibility to import a BIAR file of the same software version using the Upgrade Management Tool. In XI 3.1 this became quite standard during a recovery procedure to load the BIAR file using Import Wizard and then select only the objects you need to recover. In combination with the short coming of LCM not to be able to select individual objects this is a real sad thing (#factoryofsadness …). Dear SAP: Just give us back basic functionalities like restoring selectively either using Upgrade Management Tool or LCM!

For those interested in the biarengine.jar – I couldn’t find any hints on it in the BI4 documentation, so I took the admin guide from XI 3.1 and it seems that everything still works as before (for more detailed infos see this blog):

First of all you need a properties file to specify what you want to be backed up:

exportBiarLocation=C:/temp/BiarEngineBackup.biar
action=exportXML
userName=Administrator
password=<your password>
CMS=cloudsrv012:6400
authentication=secEnterprise
exportDependencies=true
exportQuery=select * from ci_infoobjects where si_parent_folder = <your own id or query> OR SI_ID = <your own id or query>

Save these lines of text in a file, e.g. mybackup.properties. After all you can execute the following commands on the command line or in a batch file (replace C:\BOE4 etc. with your own BO install path):

cd “C:\BOE40\SAP BusinessObjects\SAP BusinessObjects Enterprise XI 4.0\win32_x86\jre\bin”
java -jar “C:\BOE40\SAP BusinessObjects\SAP BusinessObjects Enterprise XI 4.0\java\lib\biarengine.jar” C:\Temp\mybackup.properties

You can use either the biarengine or LCM to restore content to the original system. As you can only restore the full BIAR file, I recommend to have a dedicated recovery or sandbox system in place where you can import the BIAR file as such and then use LCM to restore only what you need back to the orginal system. Such a dedicated system you need anyway for the second major approach, restoring objects from a full backup.

The full backup / restore approach

As long as you have a dedicated system available to “mount” the full backup into a running BO system this appraoch is quite straight forward and nothing to be afraid of (as long as you know what you do ;-)). The following high-level steps will guide you through the recovery process:

  1. Take a full backup of your original system on a regular basis. This includes at least a backup of your CMS system / repository database, the FileStore folder(s). As of FP3/SP04 SAP added an official “hot backup” option (see the “Settings” area in CMC), therefore you don’t need to shutdown your BO system to take the backup. Just define a time window in which you create both, first the backup of your system database and then the backup of the FileStore. In addition to system database and FileStore, please note your Cluster Key and Administrator password from the original system!
  2. Prepare the Recovery-System: I assume you have an already installed “recovery” system. This can be a sandbox or as well e.g. a QA system you want to temporarily use as your recovery system. Stop all existing SIA and Tomcat services on the «Recovery» system. Have a look into Task Manager and make sure that all CMS.exe and sia.exe processes have been stopped.
  3. Restore the System-DB: Restore the backup of your «original» system database to a new, empty database / schema. After restore, execute the following SQL statement on this restored DB to remove all server entries: Delete from CMS_INFOOBJECTS7 where ParentID=16
  4. Restore the FileStore: On the «Recovery» system rename the existing FileStore folder to «FileStore_orig». Restore the FileStore from «Orginal» to the «Recovery» system into its original location.
  5. Create ODBC source: In case your recovered system DB is hosted on a SQL server, create a 64bit ODBC source to it on the «Recovery» system.
  6. Create Recovery SIA (1/2): On the «Recovery» system, create a new SIA with a new CMS. Point the CMS to the recovered system database (probably using the ODBC source created in the previous step). Select the «Use a temporary CMS» option.
  7. Create Recovery SIA (2/2): Once the new SIA is added, change the Cluster name from the orginal name to a new name, e.g. «Recovery». Start the newly created SIA and check in Task Manager if CMS starts up and keeps up running. Then stop the SIA again.
    (if you want you can combine step 6 and 7 and add only one additional SIA)
  8. Create second SIA to add regular servers: Add a second SIA including regular servers, you can even add a second CMS. Start this SIA and Tomcat. Login to CMC on the «Recovery» system and check in the Servers area if all expected servers are up and running.
  9. Verify File Repository Servers: Check if the file path indicated in the Properties of the Input and Output File Repository Servers correspond to the location where the FileStore has been recovered.
  10. Run the Repository Diagnostic Tool: Run the Repository Diagnostic Tool in order to remove any inconsistencies between File Repository Servers and (recovered) system database.
    (replace C:\BOE4\ with your own BO install path; more info about the command line parameters you’ll find in the BO admin guide):
    cd “C:\BOE4\SAP BusinessObjects Enterprise XI 4.0\win64_x64”
    reposcan.exe -dbdriver sqlserverdatabasesubsystem -connect “UID=sa;PWD=<password>;DSN=<ODBC_Name>” -dbkey <cluster key> -inputfrsdir “C:\BOE4\SAP BusinessObjects Enterprise XI 4.0\FileStore\Input” -outputfrsdir “C:\BOE4\SAP BusinessObjects Enterprise XI 4.0\FileStore\Output”
  11. Do a «selective restore» from the recovery to the original system using LCM (or one of the other ways explained above, mostly depending whether you need to recover report instances or not)
  12. Recreate original settings on Recovery system: If you don’t need the «Recovery» system anymore, you can reset everything to match the original settings. For this simply stop the created SIAs and either set their startup mode to disabled or delete the SIAs from the system entierly (a practical how-to you’ll find here). Rename your FileStore on the Recovery system from “FileStore_orig” back to FileStore. This means you need to either delete the recovered FileStore folder or give it another name before. In addition you can remove the recovered database (schema).

Once you excerised this process a few times it will serve you as a reliable way to recover (partial) elements in a reasonable amount of time. But still it is not the “elegant” way to go. And therefore I would like to introduce you to my third and favored major approach. What SAP fails to deliver is usually deliverd by one of the add-on providers.

The professional approach

As a professional BO administrator I like professional tools. 360Plus is one of my favorite tools, not only regarding backup & recovery. But this is one of the major reasons why I recommend this solution. 360Plus doesn’t keep any separate information outside the regular BO system database, it’s just an alternative view to its content in addition to the CMC.

Let the pictures speak for themselves:

First of all you need to create a backup job in the web based interface of 360Plus, you can choose from various object types. In addition you can choose whether to include subfolders, report instances or Favorites folders in case you choose groups and users:

You can schedule this job to run “now” or at a later point in time. By the way: All the jobs scheduled with 360Plus can be triggered by an external scheduler like $Universe etc.

Once having executed the backup job you’ll find a new entry in the context menu of any given folder or document:

And for folders which do not exist anymore completely you’ll find the Trash Bin icon:

After all you can choose from available recovery options as you are used to from any other professional backup & recovery solution:

That’s it. The only thing you need to do in addition is to save the 360Plus file folder on your BO server by a regular file backup tool.

A more detailed overview of the 360-approach you can find here

Are you dissatisfied with the existing backup & recovery capabilities in BO 4.x too? Or do you see different ways of improving this process? Let me and other knows and write a comment! Thanks for your participation!