nv-l
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RDBMS X "Flat files"

To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: Re: RDBMS X "Flat files"
From: James Shanks <James_Shanks@TIVOLI.COM>
Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 11:45:14 -0400
Reply-to: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>
Sender: Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on NetView <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>
Most people who try live topology in an RDBMs are unhappy with the results
and soon switch to just uploading it, and everything else, during some off
peak hours on a regular basis.  Perhaps some  customer who is doing this
will comment.
And live topo has been fraught with other problems, too.  We just completed
some APARs on top of 5.1.1 which dealt with interfaces "disappearing"
because the RIM had to be different if you were requesting data on multiple
interfaces rather than just one.  So if you want to try it, please call
Support and get the latest code from Level 2

James Shanks
Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support



nozaki <nozaki@BANESPA.COM.BR> on 05/27/99 09:44:19 AM

Please respond to Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on
      NetView <NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU>

To:   NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU
cc:    (bcc: James Shanks/Tivoli Systems)
Subject:  RDBMS X "Flat files"





James:

So what is the usual policy for big networks (more than 20.000 nodes)? It
would be using the "flat " files for day-to-day use and periodically
dumping
the trap data, snmpcollect and topology to the RDBMS?

Roberto Nozaki
Banespa
tel: +5511 837-1393


>Date:    Wed, 26 May 1999 15:56:34 -0400
>From:    James Shanks <James_Shanks@TIVOLI.COM>
>Subject: Re: Databases X Flats Files
>
>I am not really certain what you are asking.  When speaking of UNIX, you
>can upload trap data to an RDBMs via RIM as well as snmpcollect data and
>topology data.  The only real performance issue is when you try to run
>NetView using the topology data rather letting it run with the "flat
files"
>(they aren't really flat).   snmpcollect and trap data uploading is
>one-way.  Netview doesn't ever get it back.  We recommend that unless you
>have a really small network you do the same with topology data too.  The
>code is simply not optimized to get topology data live from the RDBMs via
>RIM.  It takes too long.
>
>James Shanks
>Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
>
>Elvis Melo Vieira <emvieira@ZAZ.COM.BR> on 05/26/99 05:55:22 PM
>
>To:   NV-L@UCSBVM.UCSB.EDU
>cc:    (bcc: James Shanks/Tivoli Systems)
>Subject:  Databases X Flats Files
>
>     I saw a discution about Databases X Flats Files and now that I am to
>decide if it will be used Database or Unix Files, a doubt have arrived to
>me:
>     Netview on big networks could be better with flat files  than using
>databases and vice-versa. I know that small files in Unix have better
>performance than big ones. Also, the databases are recommend for big
number
>of data. The only reason for thinking in this way is to considere the
>Connections TCP between RDBMS and Netview (or RIM), isn it?.
>     Can someone explain this for me?
>Elvis Melo Vieira
>Opentech
>tel: +5511 3676-1338

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web