I'm interested in the community's views on this as well.
One thing that can be a particular challenge is evaluation the impact of global settings, which is impossible to do with zero production impact risk without multiple ORGs!
I feel that both options are equally problematic. The Division approach seems to be the most cost effective, but I see a lot of cases where Production / Development components "bleed" into each other, thus risking Production whilst development is in progress. (I most often see Development entities, such as Tables or Scripts, referenced from Production Flows and Queues. I also have seen some horrific scenarios where multiple flows interact (Common Modules, In-Queue Flows, Flow transfers etc.) where the amount of editing post-development (and testing!) to align almost invalidates UAT!
And let's not even start on development for / with the API!
I feel that Genesys needs to address this issue. We need access to low-cost "development" ORGs. and the ability to do a complete "lift and shift" between ORGs. (I appreciate the former would incur some AWS cost and the latter is complicated by GUIDs and so on) but as customers become more reliant on Genesys Cloud "just working", it's going to become lass and less acceptable to risk outages whilst performing enhancements.
This is one area in which PureConnect definitely has the advantage! Being Premised-based obviously helps, but....
Just my 10 cents.
------------------------------
Paul Simpson
Eventus Solutions Group
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-11-2022 10:04
From: Robert Wakefield-Carl
Subject: To Division or not to Division - what is the correct way to handle Dev/UAT/Prod
I have been pondering this for many moons and would like to elicit input from the community to try and discover a common consensus on when to use separate ORGs and when to use Divisions when a customer needs to have a development system. The usual case is they want a sandbox for development, a place to test UAT, and limited access to production. Of course, we all know the hassles of different ORGs (and costs) and CX as Code is just not quite there, especially if you don't have a team that manages your Terraform. We usually suggest Divisions for this unless they want to test beta code outside of production. So, let's discuss!
What do you recommend from your experience of how to deal with the need for DEV, UAT, and PROD environments in Genesys Cloud CX?
#Implementation
#PlatformAdministration
#SystemAdministration
------------------------------
Robert Wakefield-Carl
Avtex Solutions, LLC
Contact Center Innovation Architect
https://www.Avtex.com
https://RobertWC.Blogspot.com
------------------------------