SharePoint 2016

SharePoint 2016 Feature: Durable Links

Posted by Jim on September 16, 2017
O365, Office 365, SharePoint 2016 / Comments Off on SharePoint 2016 Feature: Durable Links

SharePoint 2016 Feature: Durable Links

New to SharePoint 2016, Durable Links is an effective tool providing link integrity management for documents on SharePoint and Office Online Server. The process works by assigning resource ID to individual documents and the resource IDs themselves are stored in the content database linked with the source documents.

So, when a user selects the Durable Link to a document, the SharePoint Server 2016 searches for it using the resource ID and opens it in the Office Online Server. In this way, Durable Links help in preserving and maintain the integrity of the documents’ linking URLs, even when they are renamed or moved.

So how does it work … let’s take for example. Here is an ID added at the end of the URL like this: fg12g0fcd105b45148d4b6c2f2xx231ce http://sharepoint-site/document-library/document.docx?d=fg12g0fcd105b45148d4b6c2f2xx231ce

What you can see here is that the first part of the URL path is Path Based. Now, if the document is moved to another document library and renamed to say, Proposal, then the new link will be like this: http://sharepoint-site/proposals/proposal.docx?d=fg12g0fcd105b45148d4b6c2f2xx231ce

In the first part of the URL that is path based will change to show the new path and document name, however the ID behind d=remains the same.

Ultimately, what is happens is that when a user comes across the old URL, SharePoint will redirect the user to the document location, which in turn opens the document in the Office Online Server.


  • SharePoint Durable Links provides another great step forward to help prevent the broken links problem in SharePoint documents as it automatically appends a resource ID to documents and makes it easier to use.
  • Durable Links works with documents that can be opened on Office Online Server i.e. MS Office files and PDF; however, it doesn’t seem to work with web pages or list items. (NOTE: In Office 365, as of date of this article, durable links does NOT work with PDF files (but the Document ID link does). PDF durable links (with q=xxx) only seems to work with on premise SharePoint 2016)

So in SharePoint 2016 Durable Links definitely expands on the functionality that the Document ID service failed to do in terms of handling broken links in legacy systems

Something New

Posted by Jim on September 16, 2017
O365, Office 365, SharePoint 2010, SharePoint 2013, SharePoint 2016 / Comments Off on Something New

SOMETHING NEW ….: SharePoint Broken Link Manager

Something new that hit the market a year or so ago is this new tool for supporting broken links . I mean who hasn’t got the call from the Vice Presidents office about links that don’t work? Why does this keep happening?

Well beyond durable links of 2016 there is a real need to have a tool to keep these links working and viable for the system.Broken Link Manager for SharePoint and Office 365.

I honestly think this toolkit is a really great way to support broken links and it’s available in all version. The product will build a report on all links found in your SharePoint Sites, and provide ability to auto-correct these links from within the tool. Perfect for after moving a site, list or library and after a SharePoint migration.

If you have broken links in SharePoint on-premise or SharePoint Online and need to ‘automatically’ convert them to use Document IDs or valid links, then you can use this tool to do just that.

Here is a sample report that can be generated by this tool to help manage and oversee broken links by site over time:

Who loves SharePoint!

Death of SharePoint Designer

Posted by Jim on September 07, 2017
Office 365, SharePoint 2013, SharePoint 2016 / Comments Off on Death of SharePoint Designer

No it’s still alive. Whats was once a staple development tool has been kicked, stretched, deprecated and even call the devils tool by systems admins … but its still around. Not quite as powerful as the old days but still an important tool for those who need a management tool in the SharePoint environment.

Did you know you can use SharePoint Designer 2013 to customize following?

  • SharePoint 2013 On-premises
  • SharePoint 2016 On-premises, and
  • SharePoint Online (in Office 365)

In this post, I want to cover the following:

  • How to download and install step by step SharePoint Designer 2013
  • How to connect SharePoint Designer 2013 to your SharePoint 2016 and SharePoint Online Sites
  • Explain some of the key features that can be used for in your business applications
  • Show you how to control access and configure settings within SharePoint Designer
  • Explain how to enable and configure Workflow Manager for your lists/Libraries
  • Give a brief of overview of the actions that you can perform on a SharePoint list using SharePoint Designer

More to follow …

Can BindTuning Benefit Your Deployment:

Posted by Jim on September 07, 2017
Azure, O365, Office 365, SharePoint 2010, SharePoint 2016 / 1 Comment

Yes …yes …yes …Lets just cut to the chase. If you are a consultant, or a system integrator delivering robust SharePoint solutions, how do you seal the deal? Bind Tuning …

Just imagine that next week you are going onsite to do the final architectural and design pitch. You’ve spent the past weeks working on your proposal. You plan to show them the SharePoint test environment you’ve built, which includes sample sites, taxonomies.  Still something isn’t quite right…

You’re not really a design expert and you are using all the same boring out-of-the-box SharePoint branding. In fact, your demo is just like everyone else’s. Problem is, you just don’t have the 80 hours it takes to create a sharp custom theme or incorporate the company’s color scheme along with a modern-look design.

Then you need this tool …

BindTuning is a multi-platform themes marketplace that provides all the tools you need to achieve a custom branding solution for SharePoint in minutes.

If you are building your solution on SharePoint on-premises, SharePoint in Azure, Office 365, 2010,2013, 2016 versions or in’s dedicated, private cloud, BindTuning has a branding solution that fits.

For creating a custom branding solution with BindTuning is easy that even a child can do it. BindTuning’s unique Magic Tool will amaze you! If you have a logo or if you’re trying to match an existing website, use the Magic Tool to quickly create a color scheme to match. It doesn’t get any easier.

The templates are fully responsive, supporting mobile devices out-of-the-box, and the final package includes all the branding resources you need. From master pages, page layouts, to css and JavaScript, all is included.

A current project with an Atlanta manufacturing company proved to be much more than promised. We even got custom support for no additional cost. Amazing ………. Support and help was also impressive.

I totally support and recommend the template and custom WebParts.

You will not be disappointed. If I had only had this for 2000, 2003, 2007 🙁




Do you need an Isolated Search Server

Posted by Jim on July 23, 2017
O365, SharePoint 2013, SharePoint 2016 / Comments Off on Do you need an Isolated Search Server

When do you introduce a search server. The current farm was searching document at 6 hour intervals with incremental search only focused on a small segment of the 2 terabyte content in the farm. The reason for such slow search was because of the impact of running the search more aggressively. It has always been know the impact of search on the application tier of a farm but I never thought anyone would not see the need to scale and isolate given the need to produce search results in a small to medium farm.

So when do you introduce a search server into a SharePoint farm.

The volume of content that you have in your search index affects what resources you need to host the farm. Work out approximately the number of items that you plan on making searchable. Here are some examples of items: documents, web pages, SharePoint list entries, and images. Remember that each entry in a SharePoint list counts as one item.

When you have established a figure, multiply it by what you think the expected growth of that content will be over the next 12 months.

For example, if you’re starting out with 12,000 indexed items, and you expect the volume of that content to triple over the next 12 months. You should plan for 36,000 searchable items.

It’s not always easy to assess how big or small to make your search architecture. The size of your search architecture depends on the volume of your content, the crawl rate, the query throughput, and the level of high availability that you require. There are sample search architectures that we advise using as a basis to plan your own farm. The sample search architecture that you choose depends on how much content has to be searchable:

Volume of content Sample search architecture
0-20 million items Small search farm
0-80 million items Medium search farm
0-200 million items Large search farm
0-500 million items Extra large search farm

Although these sample search architectures use virtual machines, you can use both physical servers and virtual machines according to the strategy of the overall SharePoint Server 2016 solution of your search architecture.


If you have up to 20 million items, the small search farm will probably be the most suitable farm for you. We’ve estimated that this search architecture can crawl 50 documents per second, and serve in the order of 10 queries per second. With a crawl rate of 50 documents per second, it takes search 110 hours to crawl 20 million items in the first full crawl.

If you have between 20 and 80 million items, the medium search farm will probably be the most suitable farm for you. We’ve estimated that this search architecture can crawl 100 documents per second, and serve in the order of 10 queries per second. With a crawl rate of 200 documents per second, it takes search 280 hours to crawl 80 million items in the first full crawl.

Large search farm

 If you have between 80 and 200 million items, the large search farm will probably be the most suitable farm for you. We’ve estimated that this search architecture can crawl 200 documents per second, and serve in the order of 10 queries per second. With a crawl rate of 200 documents per second, it takes search 280 hours to crawl 200 million items in the first full crawl.

In my case the performance of the farm was very poor. The general introduction of an isolated search server would help improve the crawl process but the solution could also be achieved by improving performance by increasing RAM and retuning the search crawl.  To test this I went to my O365 tenant and to the existing site Farm and preformed a search test:

  1. Up loaded a small document with a unique word pattern that could be searched and timed for how long it took to introduce the document to the crawl results.
  2. MY O365 Ternate was almost immediate. The document showed up within seconds.
  3. The Farm took hours.

It’s obvious there needs to be some changes.


We need to be a workforce of the future not the past.

Posted by Jim on July 11, 2017
O365, Office 365, SharePoint 2016 / Comments Off on We need to be a workforce of the future not the past.

SCOPE OF Discussions:

Over the last 10 months under my direction our development team developed a new communication portal for CSM Bakery Solutions. It was first developed in an 0365-development environment both my personal Environment (owned and managed for 6 years) and further developed in a second O365 environment which became our production environment and finally moved to a 2016 production environment where the final alterations and adjustments were made just as they had been made in all the other previous environments.

Throughout this time both my developers and myself as well as our marketing team of in experienced SharePoint users were utilizing site content administrator permissions at the site content level. Subsequently 20 days ago the Cognizant team (Our third party administrators) removed our top-level permissions without warning or provocation .. and we then had to try and support the system in a dysfunctional architecture that was not by design.

At that point and at the request of the Business, I engaged the organization to open a ticket with Microsoft for two reasons:

  1. Firstly, to get a better understanding of what is and is not best practice when managing Content Management Systems such as SharePoint from an administrative, user and developer perspective and,
  2. Secondly to begin undertaking a review and Analysis of next steps for us to move from 2016 to O365 given the hick-ups missteps and failed delivery.

It has always been our intent to be on O365 and at this point and the Business has raised significant concerns about IT capabilities as well as concerns about Cognizant as a third part manager, there role and cost and conflict of interest in managing our systems.

It is my contention that however the security and governance of this system was framed using older versions of SharePoint, our currently framed structure it is improper, incorrect and does not lend itself to the standards and capabilities given the level of knowledge expertise and capability of the Development team who engage a full level of support for the system.

Now having moved CSM’s System to the most mature and secure version of SharePoint, and knowing that we will be moving to a single tenant in the other O365 environments in the next three to six months, we need to review our Governance considering these changes and in light of the leaps in security and environment protection Microsoft has built into its current systems.

With mine now 17 years of experience working with all flavors and versions and all features and capabilities and all pillars of the SharePoint environment overseen senior Architects and Developers in my organization and many other roles, it is my contention that we no longer need to have such over bearing security boundaries placed on the Developers and Architects roles in that it hampers the process of development and administration which is the Dual role.

Given the isolation of systems in Site Content Containers, Sandbox solutions, other features in tenant solutions and our development approaches that use nothing but Out of The Box capabilities this old governance model we have now is overly protective and produces un-necessary cost and inefficacies that more represent the old-style application models we used in SharePoint 2007 than the new age model more aligned with the capabilities of the cutting-edge Microsoft technologies.

Moreover, our movement to O365 will introduce more economies and opportunities to reduce administrative overhead by third party companies that pray on companies by enforcing overly restrictive control models to hi-jack and hamstring use of inhouse personnel expertise and abilities (e.g. un-necessary hand holding that produce inefficiencies and make customers un-necessary reliance and developers and advanced users pray to uneasy rules and regulations).

And in an extension of this thought, I must question the UAT environment we have now hurriedly stood up. This environment created at significant expense (both to stand up and maintain) to proffer the vailed value proposition that it offers in that developers now have got a safe place to build and create “Workflow” Forms, List Libraries service such as excel, Visio or capabilities such as access service Information Rights Management, Customized Search, eDiscovery strategies, External access, or to provision master pages or templates or layout pages or Records management, PowerPoint Services, Power Pivot Score Card, Performance Point, on an on … etc. and then move to the third party to enable in the production environment.

What then are we going to do when we go to O365. Should we then also have a “UAT O365 so the developers can build and deploy in the antiquated old school application model. Are should we not start using OOTB features and capabilities builds in production as intended? And assigning the correct rights to develop and build such in production?

Are we to believe that our UAT can maintain synchronized images like the old style 2007 and 2010 systems did when developers were had building customization to the frame work? NO App Model or Web Part development or solution.

At the core of this request .. my concern is that CMS and management is just missing the point that this tool (“SHAREPOINT”) was designed to be used. And used by all at all levels. The capabilities and fail safes built into the system no longer present the risk of damage of failure that the older 2007, 2010 systems presented.

We need to evaluate the risk and rewards that stifle innovation and motivation of our employees and talent base and rather enable them to work with the cutting-edge technologies without unnecessary and obtrusive constraints. We need to be a workforce of the future not the past.

Just a comment I wanted to share – JIM