nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

OnTAP Versions and Replication

TMADOCTHOMAS

Background: our primary production NetApp cluster is an AFF-A700, and we snapmirror content daily to an offsite FAS8060. Both are currently running OnTAP 9.7P15.

I am looking at potentially upgrading to 9.9.1P5, however I noticed that the 8060s are unable to upgrade beyond 9.8. Based on this, I would prefer to leave the 8060s on 9.7 as the 9.8 System Manager interface has numerous problems.

Main question: how will this affect replication? My understanding is that you can replicate between disparate OnTAP versions as long as the difference is no more than 2 versions. So if the 8060s stay on 9.7, can I upgrade to 9.9.1 and still replicate back to a 9.7 system? Does anyone know if the standards have changed? I wouldn't want to be "stuck" on 9.9.1 in production just because the DR system couldn't be upgraded further. Any thoughts would be helpful! Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

SpindleNinja

If you're running XDP you should be fine - https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/ontap/data-protection/compatible-ontap-versions-snapmirror-concept.html#snapmirror-dr-relationships

If you're still DP you can convert to XDP.

All comments

SpindleNinja

If you're running XDP you should be fine - https://docs.netapp.com/us-en/ontap/data-protection/compatible-ontap-versions-snapmirror-concept.html#snapmirror-dr-relationships

If you're still DP you can convert to XDP.

TMADOCTHOMAS

Thank you @SpindleNinja ! That was quick. Super-useful chart, I'd not seen that before. Looks like we could go to 9.10.1 and still replicate back to 9.7 which is great.

mgmt-gateway

If you are using SVM-DR in your environment, you can not resync data from 8060 to A700 since SVM replication does not support version flexible mirror,

TMADOCTHOMAS

Thanks @mgmt-gateway , good point for people who use SVM-DR.