RE: [nv-l] HACMP vs. backup managers

[Jennifer Nelson <nelsonj@us.ibm.com>]

Another reason not to use the backup manager is that this feature will be deprecated in a future release of NetView.  There is a blurb in the V7.1 release notes stating such.

Jennifer Nelson
Tivoli Services - IBM Software Group
nelsonj@us.ibm.com

"Davis, Donald" <donald.davis@firstcitizens.com> 03/13/2003 01:05 PM

To:        "'Cowan, Christopher'" <Christopher_Cowan@sra.com>, "'nv-l@lists.tivoli.com'" <nv-l@lists.tivoli.com>         cc:                 Subject:        RE: [nv-l] HACMP vs. backup managers

Chris, 
My knowledge of why not to use the backup manager feature is as follows: 
1. There is no sharing of database information. 
This means that if the 'primary' NetView discovers new devices, the backup NetView does not discover them until you manually manage those unmanaged backup containers on the backup server and vice versa. The same goes for deletion. Remember, nothing is updated in an unmanaged conatiner.

2. There is no way to allow specific interfaces to remain unmanaged when a failover occurs.
When a failover occurs - all that was unmanaged becomes managed. All of the interfaces that need to remain unmanaged go critical and you could get a paging/email/ticket storm.  That could al$o co$t $omeone a lot of money if you have dial backup modems on your (international) links (BRI interfaces). When they are pinged they dial (for dollars).

3. You did mention the MLM issue.
That's all I can think of right now, but that's enough for me not to want to use it!
I use the multiple server solution and copy databases.

Don Davis

-----Original Message-----
From: Cowan, Christopher [mailto:Christopher_Cowan@sra.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 12:37 PM
To: 'nv-l@lists.tivoli.com'
Subject: [nv-l] HACMP vs. backup managers

I'll be the first to admit that it has been over 6 years since I used the
functionality.  But, I am always amazed that I see nobody using Backup
Managers.  I constantly see people using HACMP (particularly in a passive,
active config).  

It worked flawlessly for me, and even migrated over my MLMs.    The only
pain was the setup and generating containers, and handling the MLMs.   It
should even easier now that you have the ability to automatically generate
containers using location.conf, have the APM with the SmartSet tie-in, and
rulesets.

I guess I'm just curious, and wonder if people don't know about the feature,
or was there a bug or problem introduced that scared people away from it?

--
Chris Cowan
Sr. ESM Consultant
SRA International

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This electronic mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the electronic mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this electronic mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by return mail.
==============================================================================