NSS volume won't mount after inplace upgrade to OES 2018 SP1

After performing an in-place upgrade from 2015 SP1 to 2018 SP1, the server's NSS32 pool/volume does not mount.
The pool is listed as unmounted NSSMU, but attempts to mount it display a "pool not active" message.
The volume is not listed
The NSS documentation for OES 2018 has a lot to say about virtually everything BUT the impact of upgrading to 2018 on NSS32 pools .

I have two more OES 2015 servers with NSS32 pools and an OES 2015 server with an NSS64 pool.
I suspect that I would not have this issue with the NSS64 pool, but I'm not will to risk it until until this issue is resolved.

I have a support ticket (101236485541) but my support is 12x5, so I have to wait until Monday for their response.

Any constructive thoughts are welcome, especially if they're germane to this problem.
  • Dear Gathagan,
    Check with nssmu if pool and volume are update to eDir.
    Aktive Pool, Mount Volume.
    in my Case the eDir Objekt Update was the Problem.
    Kind Regards Andreas
  • There's for sure no general problem with NSS32 pools in this offset. If the pool is not corrupted (you could verify this by attaching it to another server) i'd try to activate it from within nsscon, which at least should give you an error code.
    Please note that for testing (quickshot if running virtualized) it won't harm to activate pool and volume(s) and mount the latter from an older codebase. I've just done that with a NSS32 pool which has been around since OES11FCS and nowadays resides on a OES2018SP1 server: activated and mounted it on OES11SP3, then OES2015SP1 and back to OES2018SP1.
  • On 27.05.2019 02:54, gathagan wrote:

    > The NSS documentation for OES 2018 has a lot to say about virtually
    > everything BUT the impact of upgrading to 2018 on NSS32 pools .


    That's because there is no impact. Literally nothing has changed.

    > I have a support ticket (101236485541) but my support is 12x5, so I have
    > to wait until Monday for their response.


    Hmm. From here, you posted this on monday. ;)

    Anyways, start with checking the server for errors on boot (does NSS
    load succesfully at all?), and follow Mathias' advice to get a
    meaningful error message (although there should be one in the logs when
    you try it from NSSMU too).

    CU,
    --
    Massimo Rosen
    Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
    No emails please!
    http://www.cfc-it.de
  • The problem has been resolved.
    It's a matter of "No" meaning "No", and "Yes" meaning "No" as well.

    When the upgrade process detects multi-path devices, it asks you if you want to enable multi-path.
    Sadly, when you answer "Yes", multi-path is NOT enabled.

    Once multi-path is manually enabled and activated, the pool lists as active in NSSMU, the volume is also listed and you can mount the volume.
    I had this occur on all three of my servers that are SAN-connected.
    Don't know if there's something unique to my particular circumstances or if it will occur for any multi-path environment.
    When I opened the SR to get it resolved, I mentioned that someone needs to look into the upgrade process for possible errors.
  • On 31.05.2019 01:54, gathagan wrote:
    >
    > The problem has been resolved.
    > It's a matter of "No" meaning "No", and "Yes" meaning "No" as well.
    >
    > When the upgrade process detects multi-path devices, it asks you if you
    > want to enable multi-path.
    > Sadly, when you answer "Yes", multi-path is NOT enabled.


    Yeah, that would do it. Sounds like a nasty bug if it turns out to be
    one. Thanks for posting it.

    CU,
    --
    Massimo Rosen
    Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
    No emails please!
    http://www.cfc-it.de
  • On 31.05.2019 01:54, gathagan wrote:
    >
    > The problem has been resolved.
    > It's a matter of "No" meaning "No", and "Yes" meaning "No" as well.
    >
    > When the upgrade process detects multi-path devices, it asks you if you
    > want to enable multi-path.
    > Sadly, when you answer "Yes", multi-path is NOT enabled.


    Yeah, that would do it. Sounds like a nasty bug if it turns out to be
    one. Thanks for posting it.

    CU,
    --
    Massimo Rosen
    Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
    No emails please!
    http://www.cfc-it.de