[cgl_discussion] Re: [cgl_specs] Use case - Live patching
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock at openss7.org
Mon Mar 28 09:33:16 PST 2005
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Corey Minyard wrote:
> Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> >We would stop one of the redundant processors, patch it, and then
> >bring it back up and switch over from the online side. A bounce
> >in the middle could be problematic but that is usually true of all
> >planned outages. I don't know of any telco switches that actually
> >continue running call processing on the same processor that is being
> I do. Nortel switches work this way, for instance.
So you patch your DMS's with both sides synced. That would be a foolish
> >More related is the telco requirement for version conversion and rollback.
> >Once the offline side is patched and the database updated, the online side
> >(unpatched) must be able to run against the new database.
> >Rpm does not accomplish this latter requirement.
> I don't think RPM really becomes involved here. I guess you could use
> RPM to manage patches being installed, but it doesn't seem suitable and
> I doubt smaller systems in the field have RPM databases.
> Patching is also helpful for things like radios, line cards, and other
> smaller and simplex things in the system.
Brian F. G. Bidulock ¦ The reasonable man adapts himself to the ¦
bidulock at openss7.org ¦ world; the unreasonable one persists in ¦
http://www.openss7.org/ ¦ trying to adapt the world to himself. ¦
¦ Therefore all progress depends on the ¦
¦ unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw ¦
More information about the cgl_discussion