Information Technology

Repair: FTP (Main SyncServer) Synch random hang when running sync as a service

Jeremy Brayton — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:15:47 GMT

There's been a problem plaguing our SalesLogix install since 6.2x. Our sync service would randomly hang on our Windows 2003 Server box. Eventually it became more well known as more people began upgrading to Win2003 I believe and this confirmed it.

My fix was to either babysit the service by checking MonitorConsole every day for log errors, or waiting until remotes reported a problem which usually ended up being around a week into it being broke, which in today's world isn't really practical or cool.

I heard of a PowerShell script used by one of the BPs for repair if I recall correctly, so I wanted to see if I could build my own. I've decided to release a consolidated version of the script as public domain, with a caveat: the Measure-Latest function is someone else's material and I've linked to the blog post I stole it from (thanks, by the way). It comes in two parts, an XML file called SystemDefense.xml and RepairSync.ps1. You don't have to use the names obviously. SystemDefense is lame but it kind of fit the function of the series of scripts that use the config file.

Thankfully the sync hang issue is a very easy test case, here's roughly the steps the script takes:

Get a list of <Directory> nodes under the SalesLogix/Sync/ root in SystemDefense.xml with the default sync service log directory being C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\SalesLogix\Sync\EventLogs\<Sync Job Name>\
Get the latest filename in each directory and append it to an array
Search the contents of each log file for the string "Sync Cycle completed" which appears at the end of every successful sync
If string contents found, do nothing. Otherwise, update <LastRepairDate> in SystemDefense.xml with FileName.LastWriteTime and try restarting the server. (I use LastWriteTime because it was important that LastRepairDate reflected when it broke, not the date the script ran. That really means I should use LastBrokeDate or some better identifier)
Check to see if service is running or not and output accordingly

To use the script you must change the existing <Directory> node and add each one that corresponds to your sync service profile. You can also change the second to last line to continually retry restarting the service if it detects it didn't restart completely, but I figured that might lead to some problems the next time the script is scheduled to run. I also thought of emailing myself when a repair occurs to have a history in email but I didn't implement that for time reasons, plus I'm not all too interested in knowing how many times it happened in the past year. Though it would likely be beneficial to send daily status emails to make sure a script like this is working properly.

I've scheduled this script to run every 2 hours between our sync window and it has been working reliably since created on 8/22 with our last repair of 10/29, so it hasn't broke yet. If you have any questions I can offer limited support due to my borderline n00b powershell knowledge but I'll definitely welcome any suggestions.

The files are hosted on SkyDrive here.

Herro

Jeremy Brayton — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 23:12:00 GMT

It's been over a year since I last posted and I return with a whiney post regarding work issues. The main reason I stopped blogging regularly was I typically talk to the majority of my readers on a regular basis, and I felt like just about every other post I was complaining about something. Complaints are fine but when you're reminded of nothing but crap you're dealing with, it doesn't exactly make the experience "fun".

What exactly has happened in a year? Obviously I've been playing a lot of the Xbox 360 and I've recently 99% completed building a desktop that will be primarily used for work and XNA purposes. Work has had very little variation. I still mainly do SalesLogix customization and support, with a sprinkle of Everything Else(tm). Sadly, the recent DST update and a couple of other incidents have left me complacent. My knowledge of SalesLogix was gained primarily through trial, error, and a heaping portion of luck (i.e. no formal training). Anyone with the misfortune of using SalesLogix in a small business shares a portion of what I go through and I've got to a point where it just doesn't seem worth it any more. Am I slipping? Is my job faltering in any way? No, but it's definitely a steep uphill battle and I'm growing tired of climbing.

My extra-curricular activities involving XNA and personal projects should provide me with less whiney behavior. I intend on posting more when I have the Internet at home (long story) and my desktop is officially complete. I also intend on actually doing something with my long defunct project ideas considering they’re still in the back of my mind from time to time.

Eventually I’ll try to procure a personal site to move my blog. I have nothing but great things to say about geekswithblogs.net but having never ran a site of my own, I feel like it’s overdue. I want more than just a blog can give me anyway and my ideas really can’t be contained here too well.

[Update: Fixed font issue with last paragraph]

Intellisync for SalesLogix: DST 2007

Jeremy Brayton — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 22:35:00 GMT

I'll sum up this post in the shortest amount of words possible: the DST 2007 update from Microsoft breaks Intellisync for SalesLogix.

I've had an experience with Intellisync outlined here here and considering it's Google's 4th site when searching for "SalesLogix Intellisync" (no quotes), I figured perhaps the "juice" could help me come up with something I can tell the people I work for.

During the preparation for DST changes this year, I did as much research as possible on the impact with regards to SalesLogix. I don't know the exact specifics but SalesLogix would not login after the DST patch from MS was applied. The initial response was a registry hack, which basically reverted the registry to pre-patch conditions and that is never a good sign. 6.2 Service Pack 6 and 7.0 Service Pack 1 were Sage's answer to the DST problem for good so I opted to go the path of least resistance and potential headache, which is to say I went with the service pack.

The problem with this approach is outlined in this ITToolbox posting: http://crm.ittoolbox.com/groups/technical-functional/saleslogix-l/62-sp6-bug-1355381

To sum up a lot of responses, the basic problem is that Intellisync is reporting an error during login, coincidentally the same location the SalesLogix client itself had a problem. Had Intellisync not start up or at least initialize it's sync process I might not think anything of the coincidence but it seems really suspicious. In my response (and my 2004 post), I reported that I believe Intellisync is an engine and ultimately it's the makers of the conduit that are responsible for it's behavior. Since my 2004 post both the engine and conduit updates have been given by Sage so my assessment seems pretty fair.

I didn't write this post to point fingers or play the blame game. As of this point, almost a month after the upgrade, I no longer care. I simply want this answered: Will it be fixed? If so, when?

If the problem can't be fixed, documentation should be updated to report the fact that someone who buys SalesLogix after 3/11/2007 most likely will not have a working Intellisync. It's misleading at best, false advertising at worst. The only 2 entities with the keys to fixing the problem are Sage and Nokia (previously Pumatech). I've heard nothing through official channels to suggest there is even an issue from either party. According to this link, Novell was quick to supply an Intellisync update to deal with the DST issue (scroll down to GroupWiseMobileServerDST.exe or do a search). It's not technically the same as the engine SalesLogix uses but it does suggest that the ball is silently in Sage's court, if a match is even being played (to overuse the metaphor).

Technology Books: Conversation vs. Technical Reference

Jeremy Brayton — Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:52:00 GMT

My buddy Bill recently has been requesting ideas for his upcoming Speech Server book. He discussed tone of the material and I thought I'd elaborate a little on the difference between a conversational and a technical reference tone.

I remember certain things about my CS (Computer Science) 101 class not because of Pascal (the greatest language EVAR (only because it was the first that turned the development light on)) but because the teacher had a way of relating the material to us in a way we could easily remember it. I even remember his mannerisms and the way he spoke perfectly clear to this day and it's been almost 10 years since I've been in the class.

I think the main problem is there is no category for conversational vs. "Linux man page dry technical" tone. If you haven't had the "luxury" of trying to decipher a man page just to get a working example, consider yourself fortunate. Personally I can't stand that type of material in a couple pages of man much less an entire book of it. Conversations are much easier for me to remember especially if the topic is done correctly. I may have been told 1000 times about Debug.Assert but if done right I usually remember the one anecdotal reference.

The main reason I read blogs is because I can't remember MSDN documentation to save my life. I can however remember what person X said about technology Y and use MSDN as a fall-back mechanism. The beauty and beast of this is it is "pushed" to me but that also means I have to wait for it in most cases. I usually never know I need technology Y until someone explains it in words I can understand. I don't have all day to decipher man pages so in general I skip any technology that can't be explained in terms I understand. If I need certification to begin touching your technology guess what? I'm not interested.

Then again there is that part of me that likes what I call the "transformer effect". I never read instruction manuals even as a kid. When I got a new transformer I would always tinker with it until I figured out exactly how I could turn it from A to B. The only time I ever picked up the manual was when I had a six changer and that's because I found 5/6 and the last one was evading me. That's how I approach technology in general for the most part. I can figure out 5/6 but the last sixth usually requires a manual of some sort. Keep it dry and all I'll do is search for a topic and put it away. Make it a conversation and I'll read it from start to finish like a book. For the record, I've never read a manual from start to finish. The only time I come close is video game manuals and that's because I need reading material when I'm taking a dump and it's just the right amount of material needed to finish the deed.

That was my idea. Really. No, seriously. I thought of it all by myself.

Jeremy Brayton — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 19:22:00 GMT

The title and post is a somewhat inside joke between my friends and I. When we make accomplishments together like beat a level in a single player game, one of us typically says something like “I did that. I unlocked that car all by myself. See that? I just beat the game...” or something completely arrogant yet partially true. Yes we may have made a contribution but it was a team effort that we all willingly condemn.

When I saw this page on the IEBlog: Better Website Identification and Extended Validation Certificates in IE7 and Other Browsers I had an “arrogant moment.” A “I remember thinking of something quite close to that, if not that exactly” kind of thought. So I started digging for my comment and it was just outside my RSS reader's sphere of influence meaning I couldn't just browse the comments for my entry. I had to dig but I didn't have to go that far outside of the window before I found my suggestion:

If the status bar is a bad idea, how about modify the frame around a web page? Unsecure sites would be normal, but you could have say a red or gold ring around a site that is completely secure. A mixed environment could have a completely different color, like half red half gold to say that part of it is secure, but because it's mixed the red says stop.

Of course I don't know how particularly easy this is, but it should be something that is easy to notice and can't be taken away by View > Status Bar. I do think that what we have has been sufficient so far, but take it a little step further for those of us not quite as fortunate to remember the umpteen steps we need to make sure a connection is secure. (It's not umpteen, but it's definately not one and seems to be getting more complex, not less)

My suggestion isn't exactly what was implemented but to make up the difference all you would have to do is introduce a new color (green) and throw the suggestion in the address bar, which is exactly how Apple's Safari behaves for certain things (the address bar shows progress specifically. Don't bash me for not knowing my girlfriend's laptop I barely use). Actually it's a little more complicated than that. My suggestion is somewhat like the green color but the red and “gold” (amazingly not far from the yellow they chose) refer to the Phishing Filter, something which wasn't quite known around April of this year.

So in the spirit of my friends, I say “You stole my idea” in exactly the same arrogant yet partially incorrect way. Since it's not the exact idea I get no kudos, karma, or brownie points today. I'll just chalk it up as a silent “I single-handedly changed your application from teh suck to teh suck, slightly less.” I should get paid for this crap. Really. My ideas are obviously worth more than anyone is willing to pay though, hence no dough.

What's next? I think I'll single-handedly figure out how to cure cancer, AIDS, stop world hunger, and make sure there are no more homeless people. I figure if I start fresh Monday morning I could have that done for ya by mid-day Tuesday. Sound good?

Uhm... yeah, Hi

Jeremy Brayton — Wed, 10 Aug 2005 17:41:00 GMT

I've been super busy lately, namely out of the routine of blogging which is both good and bad. Our SalesLogix upgrade to 6.2 has kept me pretty busy.

I started blogging to keep my ideas in one place but I find that I often do not go back unless there's something I need. Posting solidifies my ideas in my head and in most cases will commit those things to memory with little effort. I'm the type of person that doesn't always have to write something down but when I want to remember it, if I speak it, write it, or somehow externalize my internal thoughts they're committed to memory more freely. I would think this is a basic thing for all humans but I have no research to back up the importance.

My blog has been neglected for the most part because I give a lot to work and my social life with very little else to give. I know it's not fair and I'm starting to come back around to this routine. This blog has never strayed away from something I really want and enjoy doing, which is the way it should be. I will admit sometimes it can bring unwanted annoyance but for the most part that's rare. That's a surcharge I should expect when dealing with other people and it's becoming less of a problem as the days go by.

I have been commenting a lot on the blogs I read and the discussion groups I'm a part of so my internet presence hasn't diminished, I just haven't been making my mark here where I should. Hopefully with a little more effort that'll change.

Request for Assistance: Computer will not power on

Jeremy Brayton — Wed, 10 Aug 2005 17:01:00 GMT

I have a Dell Dimension 4550 desktop that died Friday. The computer shutdown fine but when I proceeded to move it from one office to another, it would no longer power on. I spent more hours than I should have trying to diagnose and narrow down the problem and I think I have a good idea where it is.

Stage 1: Power Supply

To test this as the possible cause, I have a ATX power supply tester. It tests the large connection to the motherboard to verify that the power supply is working. I've used this on a power supply that is hosed so I know when it needs to be replaced. When hooking this up to the current power supply, the fan cuts on and because I left the hard drives connected they also spin up. This is completely opposite from what would happen if the power supply were hosed.

Mitigating circumsatances: I don't know if the tester has a way of testing the 4 prong “power on“ connector that connects to the motherboard. It could be that the power supply works but this power on connector does not.

Stage 2: Motherboard

The motherboard has a “standby power“ light that comes on when the power supply is plugged into the motherboard. The network connection has a LED for when the ethernet cable is plugged in and this light also comes on. This light isn't dependent on power and functions even if the computer is turned off. Realistically the computer draws a small amount of power whenever it's connected regardless of the power switch being turned on. Everything indicates this is happening as it should but it could be a false positive. Motherboards can be finicky.

Stage 3: Power switch

This seems to be the only logical choice. This is connected to a board that is mounted against the front of the case and then a proprietary looking cable connects this to the motherboard. From this “I/O Front Panel” another cable goes through the case and connects to the power switch on the front of the computer. I cannot verify this is connected properly because I can't seem to get to the connection. I've tried pulling on the cable slightly and everything seems in place but it's possible one pin isn't seated or the entire thing isn't connected as it should be. It's possible this is not a connection->connection cable but has one end that connects and the other end is fused into the power switch somehow.

Summary

Everything indicates this is a power problem since the computer will not POST. I want to narrow this down to the power supply, motherboard, or power switch before I call Dell and speak to someone I can barely understand. This will also help me bypass their scripts and get right down to the exact issue without spending hours on the phone. If anyone can think of anything I should try, please let me know. I'm fishing for ideas because I'm all out of them and I want to exhaust every avenue before I go the warranty/replacement route.

Code Camp: Atlanta

Jeremy Brayton — Sat, 14 May 2005 05:10:00 GMT

http://www.atlantacodecamp.com

Tomorrow, bright and early. I get a chance to hang with my homie Bill, who also happens to be presenting on something I know nothing about: the Compact Framework. Maybe after his presentation I can understand his posts about SqlCE and start to develop an appreciation for those devices I loathe (PDAs and Cell Phones). I suppose it's not so much the device, as it is the OS that I've been in contact with (Palm, ugh!). Cell phones are a whole other subject, worthy of therapy sessions and separate ranting blog posts but I think I'll spare you the drama for now.

Others I know of, but don't know personally are Paul Wilson and Wallace McClure. They'll both be presenting on Database topics which is an area I'm highly interested in, given my CRM background. Even though the Compact Framework interests me about as much as my next bowel movement, I know Bill will make the topic enjoyable.

A quick run down of the sessions I plan on attending:

Paul Wilson - OR
Todd Fine - Avalon and XAML
Brian Walters - Multithreaded apps in C#
Bill Ryan - CF
Wallace McClure - ADO.NET and SQL 2005

I'll most likely post some notes or thoughts I took from each session since I'm sure it'll have me thinking about something.

I have a more recent picture in my gallery here. I have a better picture but I'm too lazy to put it up at the moment. I figured that's enough to tell me from a crowd of 200 or so people, so if I bump into you, “Hi” in advance. If you're not going, you probably have more important things to do or something so I'll let you get back to it.

Gmail Invites: No mas

Jeremy Brayton — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:52:00 GMT

I tried saying this on the other post but apparently people don't understand English that well so I'll try to say it in as many languages as I can:

No.

There. That was easy. There are none left. No mas. Nein. They're all gone. I'm only given 6 at a time and I've given all 6 away. Maybe someday soon they will give me 6 more to give away but it will be another contest with more rules that some people will follow and others will seemingly ignore.

So let me put this to rest: I will never give out a gmail invite just because unless I know you or someone I know vouches for you. It will always be in contest form with rules and regulations that will need to be followed or you get nothing (I'm very lenient though).

Now let's talk about the other thing the post stirred up: Internet crack. It refers to crack cocaine which is a highly addictive substance that is abused in America. Gmail follows this as a seemingly highly addictive “substance” but that is the only similarity. I will not crack your website, your girlfriend's email address, or anything else that is derived from the word “crack” that is illegal (smoking crack rock included). If you really want to know how to do that stuff you can find better resources than someone's blog. I'm sorry that a blog can show up higher in a google search than say an underground website but that's not my fault.

So please, before you comment about wanting a gmail invite, read the entire post and understand that I DON'T HAVE ANYMORE. I will post again with another contest whenever that happens but until then please leave me alone about it. I'm sorry you missed out on the opportunity but those are the breaks, kid.

P.S. - One of the reasons I'm posting this is because I've had more hits on posts with Gmail in the title than ALL of my other posts combined. I'm not trying to fish for readers I just hope I fish for the earlier people that commented but never got a reply. You should hopefully understand now why I didn't bother.

Intellisync for SalesLogix: Failure in OpenMsgStore

Jeremy Brayton — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:07:00 GMT

We've recently switched servers at our office and in doing so I setup a new corporate domain to match our name and the DNS of a domain we actually own and don't do anything with. In the migration I broke a number of things but one of them happened on just one PC: Intellisync for SalesLogix.

SalesLogix comes with this branded version of Intellisync that simply synchronizes SalesLogix data to Groupwise, Notes 4 or 5, and Outlook 2000-2003. From there we use the Palm synchronization tools to synchronize data from Outlook to the various (2) palm devices our remote salespeople use. This is the typical setup of anyone wishing to synchronize SalesLogix data to their palm unless of course you actually paid for the full version of Intellisync which can synchronize directly without using Outlook as a “middle-man.”

I ran into a huge problem on only one of our laptops which was a little weird. Normally I could go through and setup Intellisync and make sure that the tie in from SalesLogix->Outlook was functioning properly. Every time I tried to setup the link to Outlook I would get a “Failure in OpenMsgStore” or “Failure in function OpenMsgStore” or something equally vague. I thought this was just because I had recently switched domains and the user profile was freshly created. I proceeded to go through the steps to correctly reinstall Intellisync for SalesLogix (applies to version 6.x):

Run SalesLogixUninstall.exe in C:\Program Files\Common Files\PUMATECH Shared\Connectors\SalesLogix
Open regedit and delete the key HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\SalesLogix\SLX_Intellisync
Delete User and User.CFG directories from C:\Program Files\SalesLogix\Intellisync
Reboot
Run SalesLogixInstall.exe in C:\Program Files\SalesLogix\Intellisync
Setup everything as if you just installed SalesLogix because everything is blown away

I went through this process about 10 times varying my methods each time to hopefully find the “magic bullet“ that effectively killed this software. A glance at a help file would point out the obvious point of failure:

Supported versions
Intellisync for SalesLogix supports Microsoft Outlook versions 2000 and 2002(XP).

That meant that while SalesLogix is fully compatible with Outlook 2003, Intellisync for SalesLogix was only compatible up to 2002. Outlook 2003 introduced a new kind of PST file that uses Unicode and a couple of other important additions. I setup the user's profile to use the newer Outlook 2003 PST file instead of the 97-2002 PST file because it defaults to the newer format. The only reason it was working previously is because it was upgraded from Outlook 2000->2003 and I let it keep all of the profile and PST file settings.

Abridged answer:

If you are using SalesLogix 5.x->6.2 and Outlook 2003 and you would like to synchronize between the two, do NOT use the default Office 2003 PST file. You MUST use the 97-2002 PST file or it simply will not work at all, period. You will not pass go and you will not collect $200.

Who's gonna fix it?:

That's a good question. Intellisync sells their “engine” that is then branded by companies like SalesLogix. SalesLogix could have an older engine that handles the Outlook connection. If the engine itself is what handles Outlook 2000, 2002, or 2003 then the engine needs to be upgraded. If SalesLogix codes the connections and they hastily forgot to include a version that works with 2003 then the problem is with SalesLogix.

What do I think? I think either way SalesLogix is to blame. Most likely Intellisync's engine has been updated but updates cost money. SalesLogix either didn't bother to upgrade the engine because it would cause more work for them or they didn't bother updating their code because it would also cause more work for them. Office 2003 compatibility wasn't introduced until 6.1 Service Pack 1 even though they had enough time during beta to release it with the release of 6.1. I suppose they don't like using beta products to spec out code but Microsoft RARELY drastically changes products from say Beta 1 to Beta 2 then RTM (usually never a Beta 3). They could have used beta 2 and had it ready for the shipping of 6.1 but I won't go there.

SalesLogix is more than adequately priced to upkeep certain things like this. If you want a price comparison go here: http://www.blytheco.com/saleslogix/price.asp. The version we own is the “Advanced Customization & Security CRM Suite” which starts at about $7,250.00. We have maintenance plans that are roughly $1-2k a year that make sure we have every new version as it comes out. To put it simply: SalesLogix makes more than enough money to fix stuff like this. A coder with a Porsche is still a damned coder that has to earn the money the product is worth.

I think I seem grumpy like someone I know when I write this but I really am not. I just have a problem with companies that develop software that don't seem to put in the effort required to produce a decent product worth the cost. I said the same for HP here even though HP is an exception since their software comes bundled for FREE with their scanners. With SalesLogix there's simply no excuse.