Can a Cisco MDS switch be upgraded nondisruptively ?

Question

Take a look at:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/storage/san_switches/m

ds9000/sw/rel_3_x/release/notes/14116_05.html#wp335832

And take a look at table 6.

You don't need dual supervisor engines to do this.
Even a simple MDS9124 can be upgraded

nondisruptively

! I've done it tons of times. But be warned:

halfway

the upgrade you'll get a message and if that one
tells you it could be disruptive, make sure you

can

take appropriate actions.

do you know what that condition is ..that makes NDU
...."you are out of luck, reboot sucker NDU"

dynamox · Accepted Answer

Take a look at:http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/storage/san_switches/mds9000/sw/rel_3_x/release/notes/14116_05.html#wp335832And take a look at table 6.You don't need dual supervisor engines to do this.Even a simple MDS9124 can be upgradednondisruptively! I've done it tons of times. But be warned:halfwaythe upgrade you'll get a message and if that onetells you it could be disruptive, make sure youcantake appropriate actions.do you know what that condition is ..that makes NDU....'you are out of luck, reboot sucker NDU' Ohh..i found it:On an MDS 9222i switch, an upgrade from SAN-OS Release 3.2(x), Release 3.3(1a), or Release 3.3(1c) to SAN-OS Release 3.3(2) fails when there is an active FC-Redirect configuration (created by Cisco SME or Cisco DMM applications) on the switch. An active FC-Redirect configuration is defined as:¿FC-Redirect configuration for hosts or target connected locally¿FC-Redirect configuration created by application running on that switch.If an upgrade is attempted when an active configurations is present, the switch will go into a disruptive upgrade

dynamox · Answer

Take a look at:http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/storage/san_switches/mds9000/sw/rel_3_x/release/notes/14116_05.html#wp335832And take a look at table 6.You don't need dual supervisor engines to do this.Even a simple MDS9124 can be upgraded nondisruptively! I've done it tons of times. But be warned: halfwaythe upgrade you'll get a message and if that onetells you it could be disruptive, make sure you cantake appropriate actions.do you know what that condition is ..that makes NDU ....'you are out of luck, reboot sucker NDU'

AranH1 · Answer

I read through the table already. The confusion I think is which single supervisor switches are a disruptive upgrade. Dynamox says his 9222i's were disruptive. But reading through the release notes that one should not have been disruptive. I have had disruptive upgrades on the 9216A switches.

dynamox · Answer

but that table does not mention if NDU is based on the code or code/hardware combination ?

RRR · Answer

The 3 models you mention are 3 old models and in fact they're the only 3 models that won't support NDU.

RRR · Answer

Here's a direct link to this table 6 I mentioned: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/storage/san_switches/mds9000/sw/rel_3_x/release/notes/14116_05.html#wp232804

ConnectrixHelpe · Answer

The discussion appears to be going in circles and doesn't appear to be assisting anyone. The upgrade / downgrade section of the EMC release notes shows what upgrades are online and which ones aren't. Cisco also uses the same format for documenting the upgrade process but their matrix does not necessarily match EMC's. Please refer to the EMC release notes section on upgrades and downgrades. If you still don't understand what is stated in the upgrade / downgrade matrix, please contact your EMC support provider and they will glad to assist you.

Thank you.

AranH1 · Answer

Rob,This is from the release notes you referenced:Performing a Disruptive Upgrade on a Single Supervisor MDS Family SwitchCisco MDS SAN-OS software upgrades are disruptive on the following single supervisor Cisco MDS Family switches:¿MDS 9120 switch¿MDS 9140 switch¿MDS 9216i switchIf you are performing an upgrade on one of those switches, you should follow the nondisruptive upgrade path shown in Table 6, even though the upgrade is disruptive. Following the nondisruptive upgrade path ensures that the binary startup configuration remains intact.So that tells me that the 91xx and 92xx are disruptive upgrades?

dynamox · Answer

Aran ..i had one management host attached at that time (lucky me), it was a brand new switch right out of the box, i just created a couple of VSANs and decided to upgrade the code (with my CE sitting next to me). We followed upgrade procedure and when the code was done it said we had to reboot ...that's when all the fiber connections lights started flickering and my management workstation lost it's connectivity. Fluke, bug ?

RRR · Answer

My guess is it was disruptive for the FCIP or iSCSI connections....

AranH1 · Answer

Alright, I got it clear now Rob. The only ones I saw that were disruptive were the old single supervisor models.

So, Dyanmox. What happened with the 9222i upgraded that turned out to be disruptive?

Message was edited by:
AranH

Never mind, I just re-read your post. So you had an active FC-Redirect configuration active?

AranH1 · Answer

I thought we were having a discussion relevant to the title of the thread?

This discussion is helping me understand the documentation better through Rob's experience.

Do you have anything to add CiscoKid?

Thanks,
Aran

RRR · Answer

Your LAN management port WILL go down for about a minute (in all cases !), but that doesn't mean FC traffic is impacted !!!

RRR · Answer

There you go.Even though it can be a NDU, you should plan this. Simple switches like the 9124/34 don't have dependencies on multiple cards, like the 9513 does. Make sure nobody is configuring zones or changing the config and IMHO you should be fine (I have been ok with this with Cisco MDS for 2 years and Brocade for more than 3 years).

ConnectrixHelpe · Answer

I think the release notes speak pretty clearly as to what upgrades are supported online and which ones aren't. There are of course bugs that can cause it to not work as expected but pretty much the matrixes are correct in most cases. I hope so, I create them

Thank you.

Connectrix

Can a Cisco MDS switch be upgraded nondisruptively ?

Was this post helpful?