If you are unable to create a new account, please email support@bspsoftware.com



MetaManager - Administrative Tools for IBM Cognos
Pricing starting at $2,100
Download Now    Learn More

Main Menu

Debating moving to Cognos 10.2.2

Started by Deku, 25 Jan 2018 01:03:26 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


Hi all,

I hope this is the correct spot for this post.  If not, apologies.

I wanted to reach out to the community to gather some feedback about the possibility of moving to Cognos 10.2.2 before Cognos Analytics.  We're currently using a single server installation of Cognos 10.2.1 on Linux and Apache.  It's planned for us to move to Cognos Analytics (a project I'm looking forward to but want it to be done as best as possible).  My plan is to tackle moving us to a distributed server installation at that time too.  Our IT resources (especially in the reporting areas) are stretched very thin right now.  We are on a version a few years out of support with our main reporting database and working to upgrade to the latest version - a project that will tie up a lot of our (especially my) time.

I've been reading through the forum posts and see there are various schools of thought on the subject.  I see the point that Analytics is the latest version.  I've also been reading about a lot of the aches and pains the community has gone through with their implementations of Analytics, but that it is being actively and rapidly addressed by IBM.  However, I am concerned that being stretched thin due to our current projects, it would be hard for us to have a successful implementation of Analytics at this time.  I believe there will be a lot of testing needs and training may need to be put together/provided to our authors/consumers to assist them with understanding the new layout/features.  It's looking like we might not be able to begin the CA project until late in the year.

So, I am wondering if the move from 10.2.1 to 10.2.2 is an easier endeavor that may require less in the way of resources (training, troubleshooting, etc).  My thought process is that while the support will be diminished (no new fixes/patches/etc.) if the upgrade is easy enough and not a large change, it could give our users the best of 10 until we can implement Analytics.  I would imagine we would keep the single server setup we're using for Cognos 10.2.1 if we went this route.

Additionally, I am admittedly wet behind the ears when it comes to installations/upgrades.  I have only performed installations of 10.2.1 on Windows in the IBM training I attended.  Our environment was setup prior to my employment.  So the upgrade from 10.2.1 to 10.2.2 could be a good exercise before moving to CA and I may also attend a new administration training course using CA.

Thanks in advance for any feedback you can share!



Thanks dougp! I appreciate the feedback.  It confirms that we will need more resources then currently available before moving to CA. 

We're going to evaluate updating to Cognos 10.2.2 in the meantime.  Hopefully if we do, it will be relatively straight forward to move from 10.2.1 to 10.2.2.  The installation will be on the same single server using Linux/Apache that our current 10.2.1 installation is on.  I've not performed an upgrade/installation on a Linux server before, and it will hopefully be straight forward enough.  From what I've read in the Forum, it sounds like it is not all that different - especially when your Linux server is setup to allow a graphic user interface (for example Xming).

I'm making the assumption that we won't have to update our hardware for the move from 10.2.1 to 10.2.2.


Another consideration perhaps is that Cognos 10 is out of support at the end of April this year.


We have migrated all but 1 of our version 10 customers onto 11 and implemented new customers on 11 without major drama. Many of the new features are a welcome addition.


Isn't it neat how a software vendor can force you to abandon a working product to migrate to a broken one.  That's so cool!  I'm in the wrong business.


Quote from: dougp on 02 Feb 2018 10:59:43 AM
Isn't it neat how a software vendor can force you to abandon a working product to migrate to a broken one.  That's so cool!  I'm in the wrong business.

Change can be challenging to manage and accept, but I don't agree that the product is broken. We had some issues with 11.0.5 but none that were show stoppers in terms of migration. We additionally migrated from CQM to DQM packages as part of the 10 to 11 migration and are none the worse for wear.

All our customers are on either 11.0.7 or 11.0.8 at the moment without any heartache. In fact, it is quite the opposite considering all the new functionality not available or possible in version 10: Mapbox mapping; data modules; file uploads; dashboards and stories; customizations and extensions; improved search and recents; etc.

As for the authoring interface changes, the main advantage is having a unified interface that accommodates all types of users. In my experience, new users with no experience authoring in version 10 pick this up much more quickly. Authors with experience on 10 sometimes have a small hurdle finding things in a different place but manage to adapt without tears or fits.

A recent webinar run by IBM on reporting techniques included a mention from the product manager that they plan to allow fly-out menus to be repositioned in a near future release. In the meantime, if it is in the way, just click a second time and it goes away. I also direct users to the RFE site so they can vote on features and enhancements they'd like to see. IBM actively monitor this site and take these into consideration in their release planning.

Of course everyone has different opinions and experiences so take mine FWIW. I would add that even though 10 is out of support in April that doesn't mean people are forced to upgrade. I wouldn't expect IBM to provide a patch to fix a bug that may surface in v10 but if it is working fine then I don't think it will suddenly stop working in the very near term. There are people still out there using Series 7 Cognos products amazingly enough!


OK, Lynn, but there is much basic functionality that is broken.  Right now I have hundreds of very angry users and 9 open cases with IBM support.  (And I haven't even submitted the new cases about data modules not working properly.)  10.2.1 was a far more usable product than 11.0.7.  The new features are just shiny objects.  Since most of them don't work well when real data is involved, they aren't very useful for real work.  11.0.7 is far better than 11.0.4, but the product is still half-baked.

New filter condition dialog doesn't offer these operators:  starts with, ends with, contains, matches SQL pattern
Prompted range filters require both ends of the range.
Can't find spreadsheet data when creating a data set.
Filter condition dialog runs forever trying to load a list of values.
Filtering by value on what appears to be a measure is not supported.
Licensing tool mis-categorizes users.
Report name is not always logged to the audit database, making it look like "unnamed report" is the most-used report.
...and other cases that are closed because they are allegedly corrected in 11.0.9.


Quote from: dougp on 05 Feb 2018 10:30:12 AM
The new features are just shiny objects.  Since most of them don't work well when real data is involved, they aren't very useful for real work. 

I'm pretty sure that we use real data and that the work we do is also real. I'll double check to be sure ...  ;D


Wow! I guess I sparked a somewhat passionate discussion.  I do appreciate the feedback dougp and Lynn.  I'm of the understanding via this post (http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg22005165) that while 10.2.x will be out of support in April, continuing support will be available for 10.2.x.  It will not include any patches, fixes, upgrades, etc., but IBM support will still be available for assistance.  This will be a great relief/use to us until we are able to implement CA. 

We still plan to move to CA, but wish to make sure we have enough resources dedicated to making the transition successful.  We have some additional hurdles to overcome due to how we currently allow our consumers to view content in Cognos, but it is a relief to hear that those not familiar with the product are picking up how to use it relatively quickly.  Hopefully, IBM will continue to release updates to CA resolving issues some are experiencing and address suggestions for enhancements as we work toward our own transition to CA.

Thanks again!