MSM Rollout of Content Fragments in AEM | Community
Skip to main content
M
Mahesh_Gunaje
Level 7
March 7, 2025
Solved

MSM Rollout of Content Fragments in AEM

  • March 7, 2025
  • 1 reply
  • 857 views

Hello Team,

 

Anyone has used MSM for content fragments?

Checking this portal:
https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/experience-manager-cloud-service/content/assets/content-fragments/content-fragments-msm

 

I have used MSM for content page, experience fragments. Not tried on content fragment.
If you have worked on, please let me know pros and cons.

 

Thanks

 

cc @arunpatidar @lukasz-m  @sureshdhulipudi  @veenavikraman  @anmol_bhardwaj  @raja_reddy  @amitvishwakarma 

This post is no longer active and is closed to new replies. Need help? Start a new post to ask your question.
Best answer by konstantyn_diachenko

Hi @mahesh_gunaje ,

 

I used MSM for content fragments. I'd say that it was complex in managing. My client had dozens of supported locales, that's why we had to create live copy for each CF to N locales. Sometimes some properties (paths) were not localized and it was required to cancel inheritance and manually fix it. P.S. I know that it should work by default out-of-the-box using referencesUpdateCF rollout action.

However, there are case when you have to use MSM for CFs, especially when you want to localize CF content.

At the same time you have to follow the strict folder naming for MSM of CF. You need to have folders with locales names. It increases a complexity of custom logic for searches (for feed, search results etc), because you need to filter our unnecessary locales or add condition to search under certain locale-specific path.

 

Generally, here are some pros and cons based on the documentation and general MSM principles:

Pros:

  • Content Consistency - MSM helps maintain uniformity across different content fragment variations while allowing controlled modifications.
  • Efficiency in Updates - Changes in the blueprint fragment can be rolled out to live copies, reducing manual effort.
  • Localized Variations - Supports localization while preserving the original structure.

Cons:

  • Complexity in Management - Managing inheritance and rollouts can be challenging, especially when content fragments have deep dependencies.
  • Potential Overhead - If not properly structured, MSM for content fragments may introduce unnecessary dependencies, making updates cumbersome.
  • Limited Use Cases - Unlike experience fragments, content fragments are primarily used for structured content, so MSM benefits may not always be significant.
  • Custom code complexity - Force to filter our unnecessary locales for CF in custom code.

 

Best regards,

Kostiantyn Diachenko.

1 reply

konstantyn_diachenko
Community Advisor
konstantyn_diachenkoCommunity AdvisorAccepted solution
Community Advisor
March 7, 2025

Hi @mahesh_gunaje ,

 

I used MSM for content fragments. I'd say that it was complex in managing. My client had dozens of supported locales, that's why we had to create live copy for each CF to N locales. Sometimes some properties (paths) were not localized and it was required to cancel inheritance and manually fix it. P.S. I know that it should work by default out-of-the-box using referencesUpdateCF rollout action.

However, there are case when you have to use MSM for CFs, especially when you want to localize CF content.

At the same time you have to follow the strict folder naming for MSM of CF. You need to have folders with locales names. It increases a complexity of custom logic for searches (for feed, search results etc), because you need to filter our unnecessary locales or add condition to search under certain locale-specific path.

 

Generally, here are some pros and cons based on the documentation and general MSM principles:

Pros:

  • Content Consistency - MSM helps maintain uniformity across different content fragment variations while allowing controlled modifications.
  • Efficiency in Updates - Changes in the blueprint fragment can be rolled out to live copies, reducing manual effort.
  • Localized Variations - Supports localization while preserving the original structure.

Cons:

  • Complexity in Management - Managing inheritance and rollouts can be challenging, especially when content fragments have deep dependencies.
  • Potential Overhead - If not properly structured, MSM for content fragments may introduce unnecessary dependencies, making updates cumbersome.
  • Limited Use Cases - Unlike experience fragments, content fragments are primarily used for structured content, so MSM benefits may not always be significant.
  • Custom code complexity - Force to filter our unnecessary locales for CF in custom code.

 

Best regards,

Kostiantyn Diachenko.

Kostiantyn Diachenko, Community Advisor, Certified Senior AEM Developer, creator of free AEM VLT Tool, maintainer of AEM Tools plugin.
    M
    Mahesh_GunajeAuthor
    Level 7
    March 10, 2025

    Hi @konstantyn_diachenko 

     

    Thanks for your help. In my case, I dont have to change the content for other language.

    Consider, I have many countries(fr, de, gb, uk, +5 more countries). For these countries content remains the same in each content fragment. In this case, instaed of creating 10 content fragment data, I can create a single live copy and roll out to each country. This would be easier if I use MSM. Also, will not have much complexity to maintain. What you say ?

     

    Thanks

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement

      Loading footer...