• State Suggested Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 27 subscribers
  • Views 10754 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Upgrade from AppAssure 5.4.3.106 to Rapid Recovery 6.0.2 on DL1000 (backup and replication)

brian.hart
over 8 years ago

I got my last three sets of backup/replication DL 1000 units (six total servers for three separate clients) earlier this year, when RapidRecovery was probably already in the process of replacing AppAssure. Upgrades are included as part of my AppAssure support contract. Now I see that the upgrade to RapidRecovery is available and at level 6.0.2.144. While Dell provides what I can only assume are sound download & upgrade instructions, I would prefer to hear a real-world experience of the process from someone that has tried it--things like these:

  • Would you recommend this upgrade or are there reasons I should avoid it or wait for some further RapidRecovery service pack?
  • How well did the upgrade go?
  • Were there surprises, such as auto-reboots of servers running the Agent?
  • How long did it take?
  • How is performance afterwards?
  • Does the UI change much? For the better? For the worse?
  • Are there omissions in the Dell documentation that led to any panic moments or inference-based steps?
  • Was there any post-upgrade reconfiguration necessary?
  • Is there any recommended post-upgrade cleanup?

If not, I guess I may be the guinea pig here.

Parents
  • 0 over 8 years ago

    Thank you for that, Tudor.

    I made it through these upgrades using the RUU and post-RUU patch with no problem. There is one anomaly: when pushing the latest agent from the core out to the agents on the servers, the core says it will update them to 6.0.2.177. In fact, when it is all done, the server shows 6.0.2.177 as its version of the core; however, it shows the workstations at agent version 6.0.2.144, and this is indeed the file version of the agent executable out on the servers. Everything seems to work; this just kept me retrying a couple of times. In fact, in one case I uninstalled the agent from a server, rebooted it, then pushed the agent out from the server again. Again, the server indicated it would upgrade agents to 6.0.2.177, but when it was done, the agent was at 6.0.2.144. So I suspect the core did not actually get all the latest agent files for distribution or this is simply an odd mistype of "177" instead of "144" by a developer.

    I thought perhaps the agent servers needed to have the post-RUU patch installed, but in every case, the installation attempt returned a message indicating that the update did not apply to the system.

Reply
  • 0 over 8 years ago

    Thank you for that, Tudor.

    I made it through these upgrades using the RUU and post-RUU patch with no problem. There is one anomaly: when pushing the latest agent from the core out to the agents on the servers, the core says it will update them to 6.0.2.177. In fact, when it is all done, the server shows 6.0.2.177 as its version of the core; however, it shows the workstations at agent version 6.0.2.144, and this is indeed the file version of the agent executable out on the servers. Everything seems to work; this just kept me retrying a couple of times. In fact, in one case I uninstalled the agent from a server, rebooted it, then pushed the agent out from the server again. Again, the server indicated it would upgrade agents to 6.0.2.177, but when it was done, the agent was at 6.0.2.144. So I suspect the core did not actually get all the latest agent files for distribution or this is simply an odd mistype of "177" instead of "144" by a developer.

    I thought perhaps the agent servers needed to have the post-RUU patch installed, but in every case, the installation attempt returned a message indicating that the update did not apply to the system.

Children
No Data