<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
Inline, lots of good stuff below.
<div><br>
<div>-Ryan </div>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
<div>
<div>On Jan 8, 2015, at 12:10 PM, Anthony Holloway <<a href="mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com">avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>Thanks Ryan.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There is certainly confusion surrounding this concept of partition alignment for me. Considering Erick's original statement of, <span style="line-height:1.5">"</span><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">For those of you sill out there doing upgrades
from pre-9.x to 10.x and running nto the unaligned partition issue...", I am trying to wrap my head around when I might see this.</span>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>One Cisco employee says:<br>
"For customers using jump upgrade (comming from 6.x, 7.x) a rebuild once getting to CUCM 9.X is mandatory since the VM will miss-align during the process."
<div>Source: <a href="https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11903591/error-unsupported-partitions-unaligned-after-upgrade-ucm-912">https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11903591/error-unsupported-partitions-unaligned-after-upgrade-ucm-912</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> This is correct, any Jump upgrade will result in unaligned partitions.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>But of course, the upgrade scenario Erick describes is not a Jump upgrade, as he describes going from 8.6 to 10.5. But, to continue on the Jump upgrade process for just a moment longer...</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> Also correct, 8.6 to 10 isn't a Jump and there is no reason a virtualized 8.6 will be unaligned.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cisco Live Breakout BRKUCC-2011 on slide 28 shows that a DRS export/Rebuild/Import is required for Jump upgrades to 9.1(2).</div>
<div><a href="http://d2zmdbbm9feqrf.cloudfront.net/2014/usa/pdf/BRKUCC-2011.pdf">http://d2zmdbbm9feqrf.cloudfront.net/2014/usa/pdf/BRKUCC-2011.pdf</a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In the accompanying video for this Breakout, at the 8:04 mark, the presenter starts to talk to this process, and describes disk alignment pretty well. Then, at 8:34 touches on how disks can become unaligned, but I feel like he didn't articulate the point
very well. Would it have been accurate to say that the install of 6x on VMWare, and the fact that there is not a supported OVA for it, is what caused the disk alignment issue in this process?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> The installation process for 6.x and 7.x will create unaligned partitions regardless of what OVA is used. There was a defect IIRC in early 8.0 and in some Unity Connection installs that would also create unaligned partitions, but outside of defects
8.x and later installs won't break partition alignment whereas earlier versions definitely will.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So now, it appears to me that this concept is only applicable to VMWare and not MCS bare metal deployments. Meaning, you could only possibly have unaligned partitions if on VMWare. Is that true?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> Absolutely true. The concept of alignment is specific to virtualized filesystems. </div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If so, then it would also seem to me, there's only two possible ways to have this issue of unaligned partitions:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1. If you are on VMWare now, with aligned partitions, and then you muck with the VMWare settings for the guest, specifically the ones pertaining to the disks. (do we know which settings?)</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> re-creating or reformatting an existing disk is the easiest way to do it. </div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>2. If you deploy new on VMWare without using an official OVA, but rather you just manually build out the specs of the server, and miss the 64K boundary for the disk alignment.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> Correct. Our OVA includes partitioned vDisks that are aligned.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If we read Erick's other statement: "<span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">I used 10.5.2 upgrade media to upgrade from 8.6, at that point you need to do the fresh install and DRS restore routine to correct the unaligned partition issue.", then it
would seem as though his server was running with unaligned partitions on 8.6 to begin with and this is not the rule, but rather the exception.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree wholeheartedly. </div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">The assumption that he had unaligned partitions existing in 8.6, would then further imply he was running 8.6 in VMWare and not bare metal. He didn't state that, but that's my guess.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> A safe assumption, or the P2V process he used went through a Jump along the way.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">However, since there are official OVAs for 8.6 and 10.5, I'm guessing the only reason there was unaligned partitions in 8.6 is because one of two possibilities:</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">1. The original 8.6 install on VMWare was done without the official OVA</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">2. The official OVA was used, but someone changed the disk settings some time afterwards.</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>RR> Right on, see my previous comments on ways partitions get unaligned.</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">How'd I do Ryan? I'm I getting it, or am I missing it?</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
RR> Definitely getting it. </div>
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="line-height:19.7999992370605px">Erick, do you have any further details to share with us since you just went through this and most likely talked to TAC about it?</span></div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu Jan 08 2015 at 10:20:08 AM Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <<a href="mailto:rratliff@cisco.com">rratliff@cisco.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Nothing about an upgrade from 8.6 to 9.x or later guarantees unaligned partitions. You will only get the error because your partitions were unaligned already.
<div></div>
</div>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br>
<div>-Ryan </div>
</div>
<div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br>
<div>
<div>On Jan 7, 2015, at 11:19 PM, Erick Wellnitz <<a href="mailto:ewellnitzvoip@gmail.com" target="_blank">ewellnitzvoip@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I used 10.5.2 upgrade media to upgrade from 8.6, at that point you need to do the fresh install and DRS restore routine to correct the unaligned partition issue.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The issue occurs when you try to install a fresh subscriber after having done the DRS restore on the Publisher.</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Anthony Holloway <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com" target="_blank">avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I don't understand the scenario you are describing. At first you talked about upgrades from pre 9x to 10x. Then you mentioned fresh installs of 10.5(2). Then you mentioned restoring publishers. So, do we have: upgrading, installing, and restoring all affected
by this bug?<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed Jan 07 2015 at 8:33:27 PM Erick Wellnitz <<a href="mailto:ewellnitzvoip@gmail.com" target="_blank">ewellnitzvoip@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; position: static; z-index: auto;">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>For those of you sill out there doing upgrades from pre-9.x to 10.x and running nto the unaligned partition issue...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There is a bug that was opened on 12/30 regarding the fresh install with 110.5.2.10000-5</div>
<div> and installing the subscriber(s) ater the restore to the Publisher.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>You get about 99% complete and run into a critical error. The install log shows errors related to your web administrator account.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Fix requires root access.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Bug ID: <span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:10.5pt">CSCus35964</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:10.5pt"></span><br>
</div>
<div><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:10.5pt">It wasn't available on bug search tool last I checked.</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>