Take the 2-minute tour ×
SharePoint Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for SharePoint enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

We have an upgrade to an application coming up which requires a site collection to be deleted and recreated. In terms of managing the existing users experience during upgrade what would be the best practice for redirecting requests for that site collection to a holding/maintenance page?

If it is under the root managed path of a web application would you just change IIS settings to redirect to a different URL?

If it is under another managed path within the web application then how could this best be managed?

share|improve this question

5 Answers 5

up vote 4 down vote accepted

If all requests go through a proxy server, and your proxy server supports this, create a rule that redirects all traffic for the web application, not just the entire domain, to a new temporary web page.

You can also take the low tech route and announce the change to your users by email.

share|improve this answer
    
This is probably the solution we will go with, but I was hoping there might be some other BP out there. –  Charles Lee Apr 16 '10 at 12:29
    
Accepted as the answer, as it is the approach we are having to take. Though I am leaning more to Steve's concept as architecturally the right way forward. –  Charles Lee Apr 16 '10 at 19:26

Or another option is to create a simple html page called App_Offline.htm and put it in the root of the virtual directory. No matter what page is hit, this page gets rendered. When you're done simply delete/nename it. I've only done this before for ASP.NET but it should work for SharePoint as it is build on top off asp.net. Must be .net 2.0 though.

Now if you have a heap of web front ends then this wont be the best method.

Check out Scott Guthrie's blog on this.

share|improve this answer
    
Good approach but as you pointed out not scalable across many WFEs –  Charles Lee Apr 16 '10 at 12:31
    
Does this have any impact though? Can the PowerShell and C# SharePoint API commands still interact correctly with the URLs when there's an app_offline.htm file present? –  Brian Scott May 7 '13 at 8:15

You could also temporarily change the DNS to point to another server during the upgrade process. Make sure that you lower the TTL of the DNS records so that you quickly can switch back.

share|improve this answer
    
This would work but we'd rather make the redirect at the reverse proxy level if we can. –  Charles Lee Apr 16 '10 at 12:30
    
If you have a proxy in between its the way to go! –  Wictor Wilen MCA MCM MVP Apr 16 '10 at 13:42
    
This would be a problem for any other site collections hosted on that server. Charles' question only mentioned a single specific site collection. –  Muhimbi Apr 16 '10 at 13:44
    
@Muhimbi Yea, I know. Consider it as a last resort.. –  Wictor Wilen MCA MCM MVP Apr 16 '10 at 21:38

I've always created a httpmodule for this.

share|improve this answer
    
This requires web.config modification AND assembly deployment though. Is there a reason you chose this over a redirect? –  Charles Lee Apr 16 '10 at 12:33
1  
I chose this because it gives me the most control over who, how, and why I redirect. It seems like your scenerio is only affecting a single site collection, so my thought would be to write a httpmodule that redirects only for that single site collection and then leave all the other site collections available. All of the above options seem to be taking down your complete sharepoint site. If your goal is to completely take down sharepoint during maintenance then I think the above options work well. If you only need to take down a subset of sharepoint, I think the httpmodule is the way to go. –  Steve Lineberry Apr 16 '10 at 14:30
    
I addition to this, could you not package up the web.config mods into a feature (prob WebApplication scoped) which is activated before the upgrade and then de-activated after. that would take care of having to configure multiple front-ends individually –  Paul Lucas Apr 16 '10 at 15:18
    
Definitely Paul. –  Steve Lineberry Apr 16 '10 at 16:27
    
There is a significant difference in the 'red tape' that is required to develop, test and deploy an additional code piece rather than have the infrastructure team configure reverse proxy settings. Though I agree that if this had been considered from the outset your approach would have allowed additional flexibility. –  Charles Lee Apr 16 '10 at 19:21

We've been looking at doing something similar and have been looking at SPOffline from Codeplex http://spoffline.codeplex.com/

We haven't actually used it yet but it looks potentially useful.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.