[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference iosg::all-in-1_v30

Title:*OLD* ALL-IN-1 (tm) Support Conference
Notice:Closed - See Note 4331.l to move to IOSG::ALL-IN-1
Moderator:IOSG::PYE
Created:Thu Jan 30 1992
Last Modified:Tue Jan 23 1996
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:4343
Total number of notes:18308

3289.0. "Interactive process numbers increased after upgrade" by ANGLIN::HARRISA (hooked on DAVE) Thu Sep 16 1993 23:26

    ALL-IN-1 v3.0-1, VMS 5.5-2
    
    The customer has 2 systems that have both been upgraded recently to
    ALL-IN-1 V3.0. Shortly after the upgrades the performance monitor
    person noticed that the number of interacitve processes jumped about
    200 and has stayed up there.
    
    This probably has nothing to do with ALL-IN-1, but since that was the
    most recent (and common to the 2 systems) change, I've been asked to
    ask if there is anything in ALL-IN-1 3.0 that would cause/create a
    large number of new processes.
    
    It's not housekeeping or the ALL-IN-1 account itself.
    
    Has anyone seen this before or can anyone verify that it is NOT the
    ALL-IN-1 upgrades that caused this?

    Here are the priv's granted in the ALL-IN-1 profiles for 99% of the
    users -

        DCL - N         CMD - N         UDPDCL - Y      UDPFNC - Y
        XOWN - Y        VIEW - Y        SUBSCR - N      SUP - N
        ERR - N         SCR - N         CPHD - N        LOG - N
        APP - N

    At DCL 99.9% of the users get TMPMBX and NETMBX

    	thanks - ann

T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
3289.1$show sysUTRTSC::SCHOLLAERTAjax, last hope of HollandFri Sep 17 1993 08:0421
    Hi Ann,
    
    >Has anyone seen this before or can anyone verify that it is NOT the
    >ALL-IN-1 upgrades that caused this?
    
    Don't think it's ALL-IN-1.
    
    Perhaps the users like 3.0 that much that they can stop using it.
    
    Post a pointer to the output of $show sys, so we can have a look
    what all thes processes are about.
    
    Regards,
    
    Jan
    
    
    
    

    
3289.2Subprocess previously deferred?IOSG::PYEGraham - ALL-IN-1 Sorcerer's ApprenticeFri Sep 17 1993 11:2417
    The only possibility I can think of is that it's the ALL-IN-1
    subprocess. Could they have done something previously to stop it being
    created? E.g. defined ALLIN1 (sic) to be ALLIN1/NOSUB globally? Or more
    likely to have been changed, customised the A1.CLD file to change the
    default to NO, and when we replaced the CLD file during the upgrade
    undid their change.
    
    Mind you, I can't imagine what they could have been doing before that
    the subprocess was never getting created anyway...
    
    Graham
    
    PS I agree with .-1, let's try and find out what these processes are -
    If their performance man is really on top of the system, perhaps he has
    some old results they could compare?
    
    PPS I merged your "priv" afterthought into the base note.
3289.3ANGLIN::HARRISAhooked on DAVEFri Sep 17 1993 17:0326
    I checked the A!.CLD file and here is the part on the defer
    
        qualifier   DEFER_SUBPROCESS,       default
    
    The date on A!1.CLD is July 24, 1993 (the date of the upgrade), there
    is only 1 version.
    
    I'll work on copying the SHO SYS to the DEC system and post a pointer
    later. When ALL-IN-1 is started here is the submit command -
    
    $   Submit  Sys$Manager:A1v30Start.Com  -
            /Param = ("a1data$disk:[A1data.Data_Share]") -
            /Queue = 'system'$MAINT -
            /Log   = Boot$logs: -
            /User  = System -
            /NoNotify -
            /NoIdent -
            /NoPrint
    
    
    	Thansk for the help/advice.  its hopefully nothing in ALl-IN-1. but
    now that the customer has seen it.... Also, another system that they
    monitor for performance will be upgraded on Oct 22. So the performance
    guy will get some before data so we can compare.
    
    	ann
3289.5is this what you were looking for...ANGLIN::HARRISAhooked on DAVEMon Sep 20 1993 23:0715
    OK, here's what you actually wanted...
    
    customer has a symbol call A1, this runs a .COM file. here is the part
    that actually starts ALL-IN-1 for each user...
    
    $ A1_STARTUP:
    $   Define /User_Mode Sys$Input Sys$Command
    $   ALLIN1      'Term_Type'             -
            /Script = OA$LIB:OAINI.Scp      -
            /User = "''A1NAME'"             -
            /Broadcast_Handling
    
    the OAINI.SCP just globally opens some FLBs for ALL users.
    
    	thansk for the help! ann
3289.6I'm right out of ideas then...IOSG::PYEGraham - ALL-IN-1 Sorcerer's ApprenticeTue Sep 21 1993 10:047
    Oh well, it's *not* that then, unless it was changed, or A1.CLD was
    changed around the time of the upgrade.
    
    Perhaps the performance man's observations on the other system will
    reveal something.
    
    Graham
3289.7til october...ANGLIN::HARRISAhooked on DAVETue Sep 21 1993 16:529
    well, like i said in .0, i don't think its ALL-IN-1, but checked here
    so that it could be ruled out officially.  i can't post a pointer to
    a sho/user or sho/sys - to much customer confidential information
    involved.
    
    since we have another site going in mid october (that the performance
    guy monitors), we'll to some compares before and after.
    
    thanks for the thoughts!	ann