unknown. installer still does a hardware check. while testing my moh problem, I used an 8.6 ova to deploy the old 10k template, made the one OS tweak to the image, then installed 10.5(2) on it. successful install.
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 9:43 AM, NateCCIE . <natec...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wonder what the difference is between expanding and installing on 120G > from the beginning, since there is the report of it only growing the common > partition. > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Tim Frazee <tfra...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> the resize cop file is for 9x only, 10 has it built in. I'm running >> around with a tac case to address a stock 9x or 10x 7.5 to 10k user build >> that results with a 110G disk. doesn't leave much space for those 500 moh >> sources..... >> >> if you shut the image down and increase from 110 to at least 112G, the >> boot process grows the common partition out. >> >> as a standard, any of our 10x installs for large clients, we are growing >> the disk out to 120G just to be safe. >> >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Erick <erick...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The VMware disk reallocation worked for us also going from 80gig to >>> 110gig for 10.5. Were on. 9.1 prior. >>> >>> The readme in the download link Is pretty good but doesn't say outright >>> what to increase it to. >>> >>> High level steps , >>> >>> Make sure you have a good backup >>> >>> Install the cop file >>> Shutdown the vm >>> Change virtual disk from 80G to 110G >>> Save /OK settings >>> Power on VM >>> >>> It will reboot a few times while extending disk then come up fine / >>> normal . >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Mar 20, 2015, at 9:34 AM, Justin Steinberg <jsteinb...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> So in the CUCM 10.5 download section for the Utilities, it seems to have >>> combined the common cleanup COP file and the VMware Disk Size Reallocation. >>> >>> There is a COP file title '*VMware Disk Size Reallocation COP file' *but >>> the actual file is *ciscocm.free_common_space_v1.3.k3.cop.sgn* >>> >>> The actual reallocation cop file isn't part of the CUCM 10.5 download, I >>> had to go back into an older version to file that COP. So that is why I >>> was thinking in 10.5 all you would need to do is change the size of the >>> vDisk in VMware and restart CUCM 10.5. >>> >>> Is there an official document on the process to follow for this change ? >>> >>> Justin >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Roger Wiklund <roger.wikl...@gmail.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> I have. >>>> >>>> Went from 2500 to 7500 on CUCM 10.5(1). >>>> >>>> You need to download the VMware Disk Size Reallocation COP file for >>>> 10.5. Worked like a charm. >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/software/282204704/18582/CleanupCommonCOPfilev1.3.pdf >>>> >>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/software/282204704/18582/ciscocm.vmware_disk_size_reallocation_v1.0.pdf >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Justin Steinberg <jsteinb...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Has anyone successfully expanded the virtual disk size of CUCM VMs >>>> without >>>> > rebuild/DRS? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I have an install where CM 10.5 is using the 2500 user template and >>>> we want >>>> > to increase to 7500 users. The 2500 OVA is 1 vCPU, 4GB, 1x80GB. >>>> The 7500 >>>> > OVA is 2vCPU, 6 GB, 1x110GB. In the past, the older 7500 user CM >>>> versions >>>> > had two virtual 80 GB disks, however since 9.1 the 7500 user is a >>>> single 110 >>>> > GB disk. It seems like with a single virtual disk it would be >>>> easier to >>>> > expand an existing VM without rebuild. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > There are several bugs on the topic: >>>> > >>>> > https://tools.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCug63058 >>>> > >>>> > https://tools.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCuc58936 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > In older CM versions there was a COP file to assist with allowing the >>>> VM to >>>> > use more disk when the vdisk was increased. However, now I believe >>>> that it >>>> > is just built in to CM to use more disk on reboots if it detects a >>>> vdisk >>>> > change instead of needing to run the OVA. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > There is still conflicting documentation on the topic, so I will >>>> probably >>>> > open a TAC case but curious if anyone has dealt with this before? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Justin >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > cisco-voip mailing list >>>> > cisco-voip@puck.nether.net >>>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cisco-voip mailing list >>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cisco-voip mailing list >>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cisco-voip mailing list >> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip >> >> >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
