Some Cisco UCS servers may lose data if power is cut off
Vendor issues field notice instructions on how to re-configure the impacted hard drives
Cisco is warning customers that certain UCS servers were shipped with incorrectly-configured hard drives that could result in a loss of data should the servers lose power.
Cisco, in a field notice updated last week and first reported by The Register, also provided detailed instructions for customers and partners to reconfigure the hard drives to prevent that data loss from occurring.
The issue affects the Cisco UCS C220-M3, C220-M4L, C240-M3, C240-M4L, and UCSC-C3X60 servers.
The problem stems from five models of SAS, 7,200-RPM large form factors drives in 1-TB, 2-TB, and 4-TB that were shipped in the Cisco UCS servers with their hard drive write cache enabled. Normally, they are shipped with that write cache disabled. "If drive write cache is enabled during a power loss it can result in loss of data," Cisco wrote in its field notice.
Cisco in the field notice said the issue has been solved on the Cisco side, but that the affected drives will have to be re-configured in the field.
"Cisco ships all of their hard drives from manufacturing with drive write cache disabled. During a quality audit, select units were found to have the drive write cache enabled. The issue has been remediated in the manufacturing process. Users of potentially affected devices are recommended to change the drive cache configuration," Cisco wrote. Cisco also included instructions how to re-configure the impacted hard drives to disable the write cache.
The drives all have Cisco model numbers. However, in the workaround suggested by Cisco, there are a couple of references to Seagate. One reference, in test details, is to the Seagate ST300MM0006, a 300-GB SAS drive with a 10,000-RPM speed. Cisco also refers to Seagate in a CDETS (Cisco Defect and Enhancement Tracking System) note.
Neither Cisco nor Seagate has confirmed that Seagate made the drives that were improperly configured. Neither commented have yet commented on whether the improper configuration was caused by the drive manufacturer or Cisco.