Hi Stephen,
ITSO should be careful with statements like this:
"Why are you using postemsg instead of the TEC adapter? I thought a benefit
of the adapter was that it would queue the event if it did not get it sent.
"
postemsg CAN buffer events, if you prep an EIF-compliant .conf file for it
and use the -f option. See the TEC Adapters Guide for the conf file
keywords like BufferEvents and BufEvtPath. Events are buffered while the
server is unreachable, and the local buffer cache is emptied and sent to
TEC on the next sucessful send.
Sincerely,
-Jim
--
James B. Federline
Metris Companies, Inc.
10900 Wayzata Blvd.
Minnetonka, MN 55305
E-Mail: jim.federline@metriscompanies.com
Direct: 952.358.4043
Main: 952.525.5020
Fax: 952.417.5686
Mobile: 763.286.5381
-----owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com wrote: -----
To: nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
From: Stephen Hochstetler <shochste@us.ibm.com>
Sent by: owner-nv-l@lists.us.ibm.com
Date: 05-28-2004 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: [nv-l] Ruleset Correlation
Scott,
I like your system. I have done something similar for managing a non-IP
satelite network once. I did not use a listner since I simply did fast grep
on a file to get the parsing that I needed to see if this alarm should be
forwarded or not.
You say your listner is generating all 34 events...so I assume you see
those in trapd.log. But that only 12 made it to TEC. Why are you using
postemsg instead of the TEC adapter? I thought a benefit of the adapter was
that it would queue the event if it did not get it sent.
Have you checked a timing issue...for example..if you get 3 events at the
same time....is the process single threaded somewhere where only 1 gets
forwarded to TEC successfully? If you are calling postemsg within a perl
script...can you check for valid return codes?
Have you verified in the TEC reception database that only 12 was received?
Stephen Hochstetler shochste@us.ibm.com
International Technical Support Organization at IBM
Office - 512-838-6198 (t/l 678) FAX - 512-838-6931
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com
|