[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MLM question (limits)

To: nv-l@lists.tivoli.com
Subject: Re: MLM question (limits)
From: Leslie Clark <lclark@US.IBM.COM>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 17:16:45 -0400
Excellent point, Art. This is especially true if the membership in the
has to be defined as a list. You should hope for a way to define them in
terms of subnets, or regular expressions on the IP address or hostname.
Those will perform better from the nvcold standpoint, but there will still be
(probably significant) overhead.


Leslie A. Clark
IBM Global Services - Systems Mgmt & Networking

Regarding the limits on the number of objects managed by the MLM, you should
also take into consideration the way that the NetView server keeps tracks of
MLM's and what nodes they should be managing.

NetView uses a collection of objects that correlate to a specific MLM.  If
you want to add items to an MLM's managed objects table, you redefine the
collection either by adding them from the map, or by defining some sort of
attribute comparison.

The downside of this is that even though the MLM's can handle loads of
devices, the server cannot handle large numbers of huge collections so
easily.  A significantly sized MLM implementation will require a larger
server to run it on.

Granted, much of your performance hit comes at daemon and GUI startup, but
in many environments those two items can be critical.

Just keep this in mind before you commit to hardware purchases for your
NetView system.

Art DeBuigny
Bank of America Network Operations

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

Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd

See also: The NetView Web