[Search for users]
[Overall Top Noters]
[List of all Conferences]
[Download this site]
Title: | PATHWORKS for Windows NT |
Notice: | See note 11.64 for a temp pointer to the PWNT V4.1B SSB kit |
Moderator: | VAXCPU::michaud |
|
Created: | Fri Oct 30 1992 |
Last Modified: | Thu Jun 05 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 1009 |
Total number of notes: | 3881 |
1003.0. "DECnet dies, resource issue?" by VMSNET::BAUER () Tue Apr 01 1997 14:23
Does this look like a resource issue? A bug, incompatablity or what?
I have a customer with an NT cluster of 2 Prioris zx6000 SMP systems
running Windows NT Version 3.51 with Service patch 5 and PATHWORKS for
Windows NT v4.1b. Each PC has 2 (one for clustering) DECPCI Fast
Ethernet DECchip 21140 ethernet devices.
They have Oracle SQL version 7.3 running on NT and Oracle SQL version
7.1 running on the VAX.
They do some processing on the VAX, then run a batch program that
inputs the data from the database on the VAX to the NT systems.
It all worked ok with minor loads during their startup phase, but now
they are in full production, and DECnet can't seem to handle the load
It now puts a few entries into the NT's database, then stops.
DRWATSON.LOG gets exception c000005 errors on PWSVC.EXE.
At this point, if you go into NCP, even a SHOW EXEC fails with a
listener response error. Can't loop, you get a file open error.
Can't look at counters.
He has to reboot (sometimes more than once) for DECnet to come back
alive.
After the reboot, the NCP counters (LINE, CIRCUIT, EXEC) are clean.
While the first node in the cluster is down, the failover pc will also
experience the problem.
I found an update of PWSVC.EXE DATED 9/20/96 and gave it to the
customer (he already had the latest NBD, NBDLAN, PWSOCK, DNA4.SYS and
FAL.EXE).
This keeps the exception messages from coming into DRWATSON, but the
symptom is still there.
The only thing at all weird in the Event Log is in the System log,
there are thousans of event 2009 errors, which say server could not
expand a table because table reached maximum size'. These are RED
stop sign messages.
The customer doesn't believe these messages are the root cause, since
the failover pc does not get them, and it loses DECnet as well.
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1003.1 | should I ask here? or in pw32? | SUFRNG::WSA028::DOWNING_L | | Mon Apr 07 1997 15:04 | 2 |
| Not much activity in this conference anymore.
Should I move my question over to the pw32 conference?
|
1003.2 | | SPELNK::curless | You're not done til you CLD/QAR it | Mon Apr 07 1997 17:42 | 17 |
|
Well, unless the customer wants to upgrade...
Actually, I'd rather:
1) You file a CLD
2) Stop giving the customer unoffical "pieces and patches".
We have had to (several times) have customers reinstall because they
installed "new components" that would "solve the problem", when those fixes
either required OTHER components that were not added, or ... where not really
related to the issue.
Have you talked to them about upgrading?
Jeff (the other one)
|
1003.3 | | JAMIN::WASSER | John A. Wasser | Tue Apr 08 1997 10:34 | 11 |
| > Not much activity in this conference anymore.
> Should I move my question over to the pw32 conference?
Only if the question is about PATHWORKS 32.
For PATHWORKS V4.1 for Windows NT, this is still the
place for unofficial answers and "as time permits"
support.
If you want real answers or real support, report through
official channels.
|