Skip to main content
Start a Conversation

This post is more than 5 years old

Solved!

Go to Solution

SKT2

2 Intern

 • 

1.3K Posts

755

March 12th, 2008 05:00

BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG and SYMAPI_C_CONSISTENCY_WINDOW_CLOSED

Here is how the split command fails

03/10/2008 20:55:06.322 10982 STARTING a BCV 'SPLIT' operation for 3 [SRC-TGT] Pairs:
03/10/2008 20:55:06.400 10982 SymmID 000xxxxxxxxx:[ 02B0-0647 02B1-00E8 02B2-0AAE ]
03/10/2008 20:55:06.414 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI execute_syscall_bcv_ FFFF(S)-FFFF(B), SYMAPI: SYMAPI_C_SYMMET
RIX_BUSY, BCV: BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG, Order17: 0X31, flag: 0X02
03/10/2008 20:55:07.436 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI execute_syscall_bcv_ FFFF(S)-FFFF(B), SYMAPI: SYMAPI_C_SYMMET
RIX_BUSY, BCV: BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG, Order17: 0X31, flag: 0X02
03/10/2008 20:55:08.454 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI execute_syscall_bcv_ FFFF(S)-FFFF(B), SYMAPI: SYMAPI_C_SYMMET
RIX_BUSY, BCV: BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG, Order17: 0X31, flag: 0X02
03/10/2008 20:55:09.474 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI execute_syscall_bcv_ FFFF(S)-FFFF(B), SYMAPI: SYMAPI_C_SYMMET
RIX_BUSY, BCV: BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG, Order17: 0X31, flag: 0X02
03/10/2008 20:55:10.494 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI execute_syscall_bcv_ FFFF(S)-FFFF(B), SYMAPI: SYMAPI_C_SYMMET
RIX_BUSY, BCV: BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG, Order17: 0X31, flag: 0X02
03/10/2008 21:00:13.611 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI poll_for_end_of_bcv_ Timed out polling for the end of BCV sta
tus. remote: 0
03/10/2008 21:00:13.872 10982 1 EMC:SYMCLI SymDgBcvControl() BCV Library error failure with sts: SYMA
PI_C_CONSISTENCY_WINDOW_CLOSED
03/10/2008 21:00:13.880 10982 The BCV 'SPLIT' operation FAILED.
03/10/2008 21:00:13.880 10982 The BCV control operation FAILED.

and here is the command used

${SYMCLI_DIR}/symmir -g ${BIN_DG} -noprompt -i 10 -c 20 split -cons


Could some one explain BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG and SYMA
PI_C_CONSISTENCY_WINDOW_CLOSED?

Message was edited by:
MrTS2Symm
Edit full serial number out.

MarcT2

131 Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

BCV_C_UPGRADE_IN_PROG means that your Symmetrix is in "upgrade mode". This is set during microcode upgrades, certain online reconfiguration procedures (including those initiated via symconfigure/ECC/SMC), and sometimes during drive replacements.

If a symconfigure is running, allow it to finish and try again. If a "symconfigure" change failed this can also be left on.

If it's not anything obvious, you'll need to open a case with EMC to have them dial in and investigate.

See emc146712 for further details.

Marc

xe2sdc

2 Intern

 • 

2.8K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

Santhosh first run a "symcfg discover" and then "symdev -hotspare list" .. I suspect you have a broken disk in the DMX. The second message "consistency window closed" refers to the -consistent option you used while splitting. When you use -consistent, you ask the DMX to hold host IOs for as long as 30 seconds. If the split lasts more then 30 seconds, it will fail.

Maybe the two messages are related and the failed disk is the root cause.

bodnarg

385 Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

I think MarcT hit it right on the head - used to get these a lot in an environment where we had a large amount of BCV splits related to backups and an Adaptive copy SRDF environment which did hourly RDF synchs/splits.

In most of the cases we could relate the change to either:

1) A configuration change we were running.
2) A disk drive replacement.

MikeMac1

292 Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

Santhosh, you should remove the SymmID number from your output display. That being said, I'm TS2 in Symm and took a quick look at your Symm. You have no failed drives or hot spares invoked. The 3 BCV pairs that you were trying to split are currently showing as split. Looks like you have been running some scripts on the Symm and the "Upgrade_In_Prog" could be an indication that a script was running when you were trying to do the split.

xe2sdc

2 Intern

 • 

2.8K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

Mike did you notice that there is a symid at the very beginning ?? Unfortunatly due to my reply Santosh can't edit his post. Can someone please fix it ?

SKT2

2 Intern

 • 

1.3K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

you mean the 30 seconds is the default time the DMX holds IO before the split fails?which command line option need to be added?

adedd18p:root [/root] symdev -sid xxxx -hotspare list

Symmetrix ID: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Could not select any Symmetrix devices to list.

adedd18p:root [/root] symcfg -sid xxxx list -ca all -v|grep "Hot Spares"
Number of Configured Hot Spares : 0

2000S-M2/5671.

my STD device would be 2way- mirroed. But the BCV is unprotected and currently accesible .

MikeMac1

292 Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

I personally can't edit but I think I know someone who can. Checking...

xe2sdc

2 Intern

 • 

2.8K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

you mean the 30 seconds is the default time the DMX
holds IO before the split fails?which command line
option need to be added?


When you use -consistent option, you are using ECA. The code will "hold" ios from the host against involved volumes. But the code can't hold ios forever. If you use -consistent option (when you use ECA) you can run in such timeout. If you don't use -consistent you will never have timeouts. But maybe your data on bcvs is inconsistent.

Message was edited by:
Stefano Del Corno

dynamox

2 Intern

 • 

20.4K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

so if i know somebody's sid number ..as a customer ..what can i do ? i don't have access to symmwin, i don't have access to dial-in numbers. EMC partners/employees do.

SKT2

2 Intern

 • 

1.3K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

yes , there was confi change and recommended not to run duirng the BCV sync.

what is ECA?

xe2sdc

2 Intern

 • 

2.8K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

what is ECA?


Enginuity Consistency Assist

As already stated, you ask Enginuity to hold host ios against STD devices during the split. This will ensure your BCV copy is consistent.

xe2sdc

2 Intern

 • 

2.8K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

Dynamox .. IMHO since the SID doesn't help me in solving problems, it's better NOT to show it in a public place. And the same rule applies also to SR numbers. Sometime it's better to hide as much as possible just to preserve your privacy. ]:)

dynamox

2 Intern

 • 

20.4K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

man ..you are paranoid ;)

SKT2

2 Intern

 • 

1.3K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

i have not been informed about this change.. Hence doing the Root Cause Analysis.

xe2sdc

2 Intern

 • 

2.8K Posts

March 12th, 2008 05:00

Yes, I am .. But it's better not to tell you more on this topic :D

View More

View All

No Events found!

Top