"Does either technique have an advantage in resources used,
maintainability,
etc....??"
I don't think this question can be answered when asked so generally.
That's like asking whether you should use a script or a C++ program to do
some processing.
It all depends upon what you are trying to do, and how well you can write
your own stuff.
Efficiency is very hard to quantify. Both methods involve additional
processing by an additional daemon, and there are no benchmarks to choose
one over the other. Generally the decision is made on capability instead.
If the processing is complex, or decisions have to be made by correlating
multiple traps (thresholding, attribute matching, and so on) then rulesets
are the way to go, because the difficulties and limitations of trying to
do that with ovactiond is what led to the development of rulesets in the
first place. But if all you want to do is launch a script, or e-mail
someone, or page someone, and you always want to do it when that trap
arrives, no matter what happened before or what happens afterward, then
there is little difference between the two methods. Ditto if what you
want to do is so complex that you must write your own script or program to
do it. Then it does not much matter how the script is launched.
Perhaps you should describe what you want to do and ask your question
again.
James Shanks
Level 3 Support for Tivoli NetView for UNIX and NT
Tivoli Software / IBM Software Group
"Austin, Jon (FUSA)" <JonAustin@firstusa.com>
05/21/2002 12:49 PM
To: "'nv-l@lists.tivoli.com'" <nv-l@lists.tivoli.com>
cc:
Subject: [nv-l] costs of automatic actions vs. ruleset
I'm looking to process some data from a specific set of traps upon
reception
and wanted the learned opinions of
the list of which method is the least resource intensive.
Method 1: Program in automatic actions directly into the trap definitions
Method 2: Set up a ruleset (ESE.automation) to do the work.
Does either technique have an advantage in resources used,
maintainability,
etc....??
I would definitely like to stay away from external trapd.log processing
because it'll involve working around the
automatic log snap features...
Jon C Austin AVP
Enterprise Management
Technology Operations
First USA Bank, NA
(302)282-3498 (phone)
JonAustin@FirstUSA.com
8884631595@skytel.com(pager)
**********************************************************************
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential
and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any
reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this
transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy
the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
Thank you
**********************************************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: nv-l-unsubscribe@lists.tivoli.com
For additional commands, e-mail: nv-l-help@lists.tivoli.com
*NOTE*
This is not an Offical Tivoli Support forum. If you need immediate
assistance from Tivoli please call the IBM Tivoli Software Group
help line at 1-800-TIVOLI8(848-6548)
|