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

Conference azur::mcc

Title:	DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT.
Notice:	Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187
Moderator:	TAEC::BEROUD

Created:	Mon Aug 21 1989
Last Modified:	Wed Jun 04 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	6497
Total number of notes:	27359

317.0. "DNS clarification" by TROU47::SLEE () Mon Sep 10 1990 16:54

Although asking about the MCC/DNS relationship in note 251, I'm still not 
clear on how MCC is going to depend on DNS.

Is the DNS namespace actually going to be intended for use as MCC's MIR,
whereby all of the instances of all class of entities, and all of their
attributes will be stored there. Or in other words, any directive issued
will result in a DNS transaction to fetch the information for the Director,
as opposed to finding it in it's local MIR.

In 306 it seems that in some cases the namespace is used, but in other cases 
the local MIR is used.

Would I be accurate in saying that the way in which the MIR vs DNS is used,
depends on the way in which the particular AM implements things?

If I understand this implementaion so far, then I have to agree with the reply
in 251, that raises the question of MCC performance. If MCC uses DNS, then
MCC's performance and reliability is dependent on the performance and 
reliability of DNS.  

Could someone clarify these issues further for me.


Steve

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
317.1	you have it straight	GOSTE::CALLANDER		`Mon Sep 10 1990 18:40`	8
	Actually I think you did a good job of it already. How and where you store the information needs to be based upon the needs of the entity and/or AM. One of the considerations that must be made is performance, and usability. We help give guidance in choosing but th choice is still the designers.
317.2		TROU47::SLEE		`Tue Sep 11 1990 15:17`	23
	Since the MIR allows the consolidation of all information, including statistics in one place, it makes the task of managing entities much easier. I'm not sure I understand why the needs of the entity/AM should dictate how and where the infomation should be stored (DNS directory or MIR). Wouldn't there be a benefit to having all this information in the same place, that any AM/FM/PM can have access to? Do you know whether our currently available AMs and FMs all implement DNS for storing instance, attribute, and statistic information? I have one other question about MIRs, that stems from my thinking ahead on how we will implement MCC in our configuration. In the cases where there is the need to have more than one Director platform, there will be more than one MIR. Now information about all entities in your network is no longer maintained in one place. Are there any plans towards say.. integrating multiple MIRs, or something along those lines? Steve
317.3	private vs. public data	GOSTE::CALLANDER		`Tue Sep 18 1990 11:35`	15
	Okay, now the first thing to understand is that not everything a module (especially an FM) wants to store should be shared with other modules. An example would be the intermediate calculations performed by something like the performance analyzer. This data needs to be stored during the processing time of the calculation but should not be made available to other modules. I personally don't see a need to place it in DNS, a local store would be preferrable, though for the recording of the final calculations DNS might be very appropriate. As to how many MIRs exist it really depends on how you set up your MCC. Though as we move towards distributed directors any director should be capable of accessing any MIR.
317.4	Alarms MIR - a better example	WAKEME::ROBERTS	Keith Roberts - DECmcc Alarms Team	`Wed Oct 10 1990 17:05`	17
	When you create an Alarm Rule - the characteristics information you enter is stored in the Alarms MIR (there are two, the Alarms Instance & Alarms Attribute MIR). This information is private to Alarms - the only way you can gain access is to call Alarms .. using the Show directive: SHOW MCC 0 ALARMS RULE foo ALL CHAR Alarms does not write anything to DNS (The intermediate calculations performed by PA are memory resident .. not written to DNS/MIR/anything) Did this help? /keith
317.5	private MIR accessed through xM	GOSTE::CALLANDER		`Mon Oct 15 1990 15:40`	6
	Thanks Keith, in rereading .3 I failed to be clear. When I stated that as we move towards distribution any xM should be able to access the different MIRs, I did not mean direct access to the private MIRs, but through the call interface (services) provided by the xM that owns the MIR.