All traps received by trapd in NT go into the ODBC database, period. There is
no way to exclude any of them. If this is a feature you think should be added
to the product, then I would send a note to netview@tivoli.com and indicate why
you want this enhancement. It will added to an enhancements database for future
consideration. But you will hear no more about it unless it jut shows up in the
product one day. If you want a more formal enhancement request, in which you
get a response from development about whether they agree with your request or
not (but not a date when they will provide it) then you can call Support or your
marketing rep and ask for an enhancement request to be opened.
It is just my opinion, but the fact that your database fills up merely indicates
to me that you are not providing a big enough one to do this historical
archiving anyway. If you are really serious about this, then you should
probably plan to use SQL and create your own scripts to remove what you don't
want to keep. Every database must be pruned sooner or later. Even the TEC
database will eventually need to be pruned.
You will have to find your own solution here.
James Shanks
Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
Paolo Sanesi <p.sanesi@IT.IBM.COM> on 12/02/99 04:49:44 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: Re: Ignore Category on Netview NT
Hi James!
I already knew of that behavior on NV/6000 and, in fact, is what i would like on
NT.
On my Netview/NT I already turned off tradp.log and only MS Access (or SQL) is
used, but it becomes full in about 2/3 days
while i'd like to have a real Historical DB of traps.
So, my problem isn't to not have traps displaied (I already filtered them) but
to not have them logged on ODBC DB!!
On NV/6000, RDBMS has a different approach and if a trap isn't in trapd.log it
won't be in RDBMS too, so "Ignore" category has a meaning for me in this case.
On Netview NT, traps seem to be written directly to RDBMS without possibility of
intervention.
Do you think there is a way to reach this result other than forward needed traps
to T/EC and than mantain a real historical DB?
Bye, Paolo!
>Original message:
>
>Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:31:24 -0500
>From: James Shanks <James_Shanks@TIVOLI.COM>
>Subject: Re: Ignore Category on Netview NT
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>There is no ignore category for NT. That function is not there. But you can
>set a filter on the event browser not to display certain traps if you wish.
>Perhaps the best explanation as to why is to understand what "Ignore" means for
>NetView for UNIX.
>Since trapd.log is optional for NT, there is little need for an "Ignore"
>feature.
>You may be mistaken about this function in UNIX. That setting DOES NOT
prevent
>reception. It just causes trapd to not log the trap in trapd.log and nvevents
>not have it display under normal circumstances in the events window. But it is
>still received and processed. And in fact it will still be passed on to
nvcorrd
>for ruleset processing, because you can in fact, open a dynamic window and
>display all the traps which have arrived that are set to "Ignore". You can
also
>do whatever else you want to do with it in a ruleset, including forward it to
>TEC. The only way to avoid having a trap received is to turn it off at the
>source and not send it in the first place.
>James Shanks
>Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support
>>Paolo Sanesi <p.sanesi@IT.IBM.COM> on 12/01/99 05:05:49 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: Ignore Category on Netview NT
>>I'm trying to avoid reception of some traps on my Netview NT : nor logged
>>(either in trapd.log and ODBC database) nor displaied.
>>In NV/6000 this can be done using Trap Category "Ignore" in event
configuration.
>>In Netview NT i didn't found a similar function.
>>'Cause i'm a bit new to Netview NT am i missing something? Is this result
>>reachable? There will be this function in next release?
>>I'm actually at 5.1.2.
>>Thanks for any help/info you can give me.
>>Bye, Paolo!
|