| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 798.1 | Tell me about this | TOOK::ORENSTEIN | | Fri Mar 15 1991 15:53 | 8 |
| Hi Ian,
Are your rules in DOMAINs? Could the domain names be greater than 256
characters? Can you do an SHOW MCC 0 ALARMS RULE *?
I'll keep thinking ...
aud...
|
| 798.2 | | TOOK::DITMARS | Pete | Fri Mar 15 1991 16:00 | 5 |
| if your rules are in domains, you might want to do a
MCC> show domain * rule *
for Audrey...
|
| 798.3 | May be your MIR is corrupted :( | WAKEME::ANIL | | Fri Mar 15 1991 16:59 | 44 |
| Hi Ian,
I saw your note in the morning but did not get the opportunity to
respond the whole day! Anyway I did do a lot of testing at my end
and uncovered a few inits but did not come across the problem you
have documented.
Here is what I did.
Ran the EXTRACT rule utility on existing data base. Over a period of
time we had ~256 rules. The extraction did encounter one problem
indicated that on step 7 the program encountered a bad status. The
value of the status was not the same as the one you reported. Also
the program did continue to extract the rules.
In the development environment occasionaly the MIR does get
corrupted. Hence I am not too alarmed that I encountered a problem.
In fact I expected a lot of problems!
I then cleaned the existing Alarms MIR by deleting all the rules and
then created 1400 rules. I then extracted all these rules using the
EXTRACT tool utility. No problem.
What I suspect is you may have a corrupted MIR. I suggest you try
the following:
1. If Extract Rule is failing, Does
Show MCC 0 Alarms Rule * All Char work?
2. If possible, can you recreate the MIR and load it with the 1500
--------
rules again? (Rename MCC_ALARMS_MIR*.DAT to some other name
and then try to load MIR with 1500 rules.)
3. Can you try all the above on V1.1 SSB version?
Please post the results. We can then see if we can put our hands on
the problem.
Regards,
- Anil
|
| 798.4 | | SUBURB::SMYTHI | Ian Smyth 830-3869 | Mon Mar 18 1991 06:24 | 285 |
|
All my rules are in domains. The SHOW DOMAIN * RULE * worked
as expected.
I renamed all the MCC_ALARMS*_MIR.DAT files to *.DAT_OLD and
created new ones by adding a few rules to one domain. I then ran
MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES again and it failed.
So I renamed the MIR files again and created new ones by
adding one rule to one domain. The extract procedure failed again.
ie
DECmcc (V1.1.0)
MCC>show domain * rule *
Using default ALL IDENTIFIERS
Domain UKHUB_NS:.EASYnet Rule A41RT1_Max_Address
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:05:50 Identifiers
Examination of attributes shows:
Name = A41RT1_Max_Address
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Reading Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:05:52 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Reading Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Reading Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.test Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:00 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.test Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.test Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Central_UK Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:00 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Central_UK Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Central_UK
Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.France Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:00 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.France Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.France Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Geneva Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:01 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Geneva Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Geneva Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Germany Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:01 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Germany Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Germany Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.GIA Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:01 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.GIA Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.GIA Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Iberia Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:02 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Iberia Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Iberia Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Ireland Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:02 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Ireland Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Ireland Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Italy Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:02 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Italy Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Italy Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.London Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:03 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.London Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.London Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Nordic Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:03 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Nordic Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Nordic Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.North_UK Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:03 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.North_UK Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.North_UK
Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Reading Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:04 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Reading Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Reading Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.DOMAINS.reo_Bridges Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:04 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.DOMAINS.reo_Bridges Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.DOMAINS.reo_Bridges
Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.reo_IP Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:04 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.reo_IP Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.reo_IP Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.reo_ts Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:05 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.reo_ts Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.reo_ts Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.South_UK Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:05 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.South_UK Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.South_UK
Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.telecom_dcc Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:06 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.telecom_dcc Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.telecom_dcc
Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.uk Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:06 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.uk Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.uk Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.USA Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:06 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.USA Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.USA Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Valbonne Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:07 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Valbonne Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Valbonne
Rule *
Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Western_Europe Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:07 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Western_Europe Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain
UKHUB_NS:.Domains.Western_Europe Rule
*
Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.world Rule *
AT 18-MAR-1991 11:06:09 Identifiers
No such entity: Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.world Rule *
Unknown Entity = Domain UKHUB_NS:.domains.world Rule *
$
$Run sys$system:mcc_alarms_extract_rules
MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES
- Generating a Procedure to Rebuild the Alarms MIR
- Output File: MCC_ALARMS_RULES.COM
WRITE-PROCEDURE failed on step 2
[ 0 ] (
[ 4 ] (
[ 6 ] (
[ 1 ] 06
[ 2 ] 53 59 53 24 43 4f 4d 4d 4f 4e 3a 5b 4d 43 43 5d 4d 43 43 5f
41 4c 41 52 4d 53 5f 4c 4f 47 5f 41 4c 41 52 4d 2e 43 4f 4d
3b 31 -- SYS$COMMON:[MCC]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_ALARM.COM;1
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 10 ] (
[ 1 ] 06
[ 2 ] 53 59 53 24 43 4f 4d 4d 4f 4e 3a 5b 4d 43 43 5d 4d 43 43 5f
41 4c 41 52 4d 53 5f 4c 4f 47 5f 45 58 43 45 50 54 49 4f 4e
2e 43 4f 4d 3b 31 -- SYS$COMMON:[MCC]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_EXCEPTION.COM;1
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 3 ] (
[ 1 ] 03
[ 2 ] 54 68 65 20 76 61 6c 75 65 20 20 66 6f 72 20 74 68 69 73 20
63 68 61 72 61 63 74 65 72 69 73 74 69 63 20 69 73 20 72 65
63 6f 6d 6d 65 6e 64 65 64 20 20 20 74 6f 20 62 65 20 31 30
32 33 2e 20 20 49 66 20 74 68 65 20 6d 61 78 69 6d 75 6d 20
61 64 64 72 65 73 73 20 69 73 20 6c 65 73 73 20 74 68 61 74
20 31 30 32 33 2c 20 63 6f 6d 6d 75 6e 69 63 61 74 69 6f 6e
20 20 20 62 65 74 77 65 65 6e 20 63 65 72 74 61 69 6e 20 6e
6f 64 65 73 20 77 69 6c 6c 20 62 65 20 69 6d 70 6f 73 73 69
62 6c 65 2e -- The value for this characteristic is recommended to be 1023. If the maximum address is less that 1023, communication between certain nodes will be impossible.
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 4 ] (
[ 1 ] 03
[ 2 ] 43 6f 6e 66 69 67 75 72 61 74 69 6f 6e 20 70 72 6f 62 6c 65
6d -- Configuration problem
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 7 ] (
[ 1 ] 03
[ 2 ] 41 4c 41 52 4d 53 24 42 41 54 43 48 -- ALARMS$BATCH
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 8 ] (
[ 1 ] 03
[ 2 ] 4e 4f 44 45 5f 41 4c 41 52 4d 53 2e 4c 4f 47 -- NODE_ALARMS.LOG
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 2 ] (
[ 1 ] 1a
[ 2 ] 28 4e 4f 44 45 34 20 41 34 31 52 54 31 20 4d 41 58 49 4d 55
4d 20 41 44 44 52 45 53 53 20 3c 20 31 30 32 33 2c 20 41 54
20 45 56 45 52 59 20 30 30 3a 31 35 3a 30 30 29 -- (NODE4 A41RT1 MAXIMUM ADDRESS < 1023, AT EVERY 00:15:00)
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 21 ] (
[ 1 ] 0a
[ 2 ] 01
[ 3 ] 00
)
[ 5 ] (
[ 1 ] 02
[ 2 ] a5 82 00 a0 a1 82 00 06 81 01 12 82 01 00 a2 82 00 2a 81 01
17 82 01 01 a6 82 00 20 81 01 12 82 01 03 83 12 41 54 20 45
56 45 52 59 20 30 30 3a 31 35 3a 30 30 20 84 01 00 85 01 01
a3 82 00 06 81 01 0b 82 01 00 a4 82 00 1a 81 01 13 82 01 01
a6 82 00 10 81 01 02 82 01 22 83 02 03 ff 84 01 00 85 01 01
a5 82 00 3c 81 01 15 82 01 00 a5 82 00 32 a1 82 00 18 a0 82
00 14 81 01 01 82 01 0c 83 01 01 84 01 18 85 06 41 34 31 52
54 31 82 01 04 83 01 61 85 01 22 86 01 00 a9 82 00 03 81 01
00 88 01 01
[ 3 ] 00
)
)
)
>>> EXIT - Alarms MIR extraction completed successfully
MCC_ALARMS_RULES.COM contains no rules ie
$ty mcc_alarms_rules.com
!
! MCC Alarm Rules
!
$
I won't be able to put up the SSB kit until Friday
regards,
Ian
|
| 798.5 | Can I copy your MIR at my end? | WAKEME::ANIL | | Mon Mar 18 1991 18:34 | 26 |
| Hi Ian,
Based on your problem I did more testing at my end only to find out
that things work very well at my end. I am obviously trying to look
some where, where the problem does not exist. :(
Well we have three choices.
1. Let me copy your *MIR*.dat files at my end and examine the intigrity
of data structures.
2. Take this off line and let me try to test things in your environment
by logging into your accout.
3. Wait till Friday for you to install the SSB kit and then,
A. Test with new MIR and see if extract rule utility has problems
B. Test with old mir and see if Extract rule utility has a problem.
If you do decide to wait till Friday, can you make sure that you have no
MIR files in MCC_COMMON and MCC_SYSTEM area? Thanks.
Let us know what you plan on doing...
- Anil
|
| 798.6 | | SUBURB::SMYTHI | Ian Smyth 830-3869 | Tue Mar 19 1991 09:05 | 17 |
| Anil,
I installed the SSB kit this morning ( after removing the
*alarms*mir.dat file from mcc_common.).
The installation went OK and I created one rule in a domain
(.easynet). MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES failed again. I deleted the rule
and created the same rule omitting the "in domain" qualifier and the
MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES worked.
So it appears that the extract failed when it tried to get a
rule from a domain.
Any ideas?
regards,
Ian
|
| 798.7 | perhaps a problem with ILV decoding? | TOOK::GUERTIN | I want my MCC | Tue Mar 19 1991 09:19 | 31 |
| I would like to add a couple of suggestions. First, the MCC status
code at the end:
>>> EXIT - Alarms MIR extraction error ... MCC Status Code = 52875202
is MCC_S_ILVTOOBIG -- no more room in buffer for additional values
Which makes sense if you look at the output (ILV encoding dumps).
I can only assume this is happening on a call to mcc_ilv_get(),
while formatting the commands. Are there any particularly long
fields defined for any of the rules?
Also, I seem to recall an Alarms problem with the pre-ssb kit when
_every_ alarm rule argument was specified. I don't remember the
details, but hopefully this is enough information to jar someones
memory. Local MIR corruptions on user sites are very rare, usually the
system has to crash in the middle of an RMS write or more commonly, the
disk is bad.
One last thing. You mentioned that you installed the pre-ssb kit. But
I don't recall you mentioning which version of MCC you were installing
over.
With the lack of leads, perhaps the Alarms team should get a copy of
your MIR files for further investigation off line (assuming there is no
confidential information store in them). I am curious about this
phenomenon as well.
-Matt.
|
| 798.8 | | SUBURB::SMYTHI | Ian Smyth 830-3869 | Tue Mar 19 1991 10:47 | 56 |
| > Also, I seem to recall an Alarms problem with the pre-ssb kit when
> _every_ alarm rule argument was specified. I don't remember the
> details, but hopefully this is enough information to jar someones
> memory. Local MIR corruptions on user sites are very rare, usually the
The rule which fails to get extracted is -
$ MANAGE/ENTERPRISE
CREATE MCC 0 ALARMS RULE A41RT1_Max_Address -
EXPRESSION = (NODE4 A41RT1 MAXIMUM ADDRESS < 1023, AT EVERY 00:15:00), -
PROCEDURE = MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_LOG_ALARM.COM, -
EXCEPTION HANDLER = MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_LOG_EXCEPTION.COM, -
CATEGORY = "Configuration problem", -
DESCRIPTION = "The value for this characteristic is recommended -
to be 1023. If the maximum address is less that 1023, communication -
between certain nodes will be impossible.", -
QUEUE = "ALARMS$BATCH", -
PARAMETER = "NODE_ALARMS.LOG", -
Perceived Severity = CRITICAL, -
in Domain = .EASYnet
The rule which succeeds in getting extracted is -
$ MANAGE/ENTERPRISE
CREATE MCC 0 ALARMS RULE A41RT1_Max_Address -
EXPRESSION = (NODE4 A41RT1 MAXIMUM ADDRESS < 1023, AT EVERY 00:15:00), -
PROCEDURE = MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_LOG_ALARM.COM, -
EXCEPTION HANDLER = MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_LOG_EXCEPTION.COM, -
CATEGORY = "Configuration problem", -
DESCRIPTION = "The value for this characteristic is recommended -
to be 1023. If the maximum address is less that 1023, communication -
between certain nodes will be impossible.", -
QUEUE = "ALARMS$BATCH", -
PARAMETER = "NODE_ALARMS.LOG", -
Perceived Severity = CRITICAL
> One last thing. You mentioned that you installed the pre-ssb kit. But
> I don't recall you mentioning which version of MCC you were installing
> over.
I didn't. On a brand new VMS 5.4 system, I installed the MCCBMS011
kit dated 5-feb-1991.
> With the lack of leads, perhaps the Alarms team should get a copy of
> your MIR files for further investigation off line (assuming there is no
> confidential information store in them). I am curious about this
> phenomenon as well.
Anil and I are playing telephone tag at the moment.
regards,
Ian
|
| 798.9 | Time to take it off line? | WAKEME::ANIL | | Tue Mar 19 1991 18:20 | 101 |
| Hi Ian,
I guess we will have to take this off line. Just to update you. I
tried your rule as typed by you. Made another 10 rules similar
to yours, then ran extract rule utility. No sign of any problem.
I then made the description much much bigger. Tried again. No luck.
It always worked. :(
Just so that we make sure we have the same exe following are
the details of my EXEs. Do these match with yours.
MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES.EXE;1 334 24-FEB-1991 14:47:20.18
MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE;1 585 28-FEB-1991 09:59:23.81
I am now doing code review just to make sure if a variable was not
initialized. So far I have not had much luck. Please send me the
pointers to your MIR and also call me tomorrow at about 9:00 EST.
I think I will have to log into your system to see what is it
in your system that is exposing the bug that we can not produce
at my end!
- Anil
PS.
I am running V1.1 SSB (-3days) The final kit had the same ALARMS
EXE that I have but I guess the dictionary was rebuild. This should
not make any difference.
Also I am running V5.3, Again I don't see how this should make any
difference. But then again you are seeing the problem and I am not!
===========================================================================================================
Input rule based on your note 798.8
===========================================================================================================
!
Create MCC 0 ALARMS RULE A41RT1_Max_Address -
Category = "Configuration problem: Rule Description > 500 bytes", -
Description = "01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 -
01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 -
01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 -
01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 -
0123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890",-
Expression = (NODE4 A41RT1 MAXIMUM ADDRESS < 1023, AT EVERY 00:15:00), -
Procedure = WAKEME_USER:[MCC-COMMON]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_ALARM.COM;11, -
Exception Handler = WAKEME_USER:[MCC-COMMON]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_EXCEPTION.COM;11, -
Parameter = "NODE_ALARMS.LOG", -
Queue = "ALARMS$BATCH", -
Perceived Severity = critical, -
in domain = WAKEME_NS:.EASYNET
==============================================================================================================
Result after running extract rule utility
==============================================================================================================
!
! MCC Alarm Rules
!
!
:
:
!
Create MCC 0 ALARMS RULE A41RT1_Max_Address -
Category = "Configuration problem: Rule Description > 500 bytes", -
Description = "01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 01234567890123456789012345678890123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890 0123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890", -
Expression = (NODE4 A41RT1 MAXIMUM ADDRESS < 1023, AT EVERY 00:15:00), -
Procedure = WAKEME_USER:[MCC-COMMON]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_ALARM.COM;11, -
Exception Handler = WAKEME_USER:[MCC-COMMON]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_EXCEPTION.COM;11, -
Parameter = "NODE_ALARMS.LOG", -
Queue = "ALARMS$BATCH", -
Perceived Severity = critical, -
in domain = WAKEME_NS:.EASYN
!
!
! Same rule but reformatted
!
Create MCC 0 ALARMS RULE A41RT1_Max_Address -
Category = "Configuration problem: Rule Description > 500 bytes", -
Description = "012345678901234567890123456788901234567890123456789
0123456788901234567890123456789012345678890123456789
0123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890
1234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890
123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890
1234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890
0123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890
1234567889012345678901234567890123456788901234567890
0123456789012345678901234567889012345678901234567890
123456788901234567890", -
Expression = (NODE4 A41RT1 MAXIMUM ADDRESS < 1023, AT EVERY 00:15:00), -
Procedure = WAKEME_USER:[MCC-COMMON]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_ALARM.COM;11, -
Exception Handler = WAKEME_USER:[MCC-COMMON]MCC_ALARMS_LOG_EXCEPTION.COM;11, -
Parameter = "NODE_ALARMS.LOG", -
Queue = "ALARMS$BATCH", -
Perceived Severity = critical, -
in domain = WAKEME_NS:.EASYN
|
| 798.10 | Perhaps difference in DNS | TOOK::ORENSTEIN | | Fri Mar 22 1991 10:38 | 16 |
| Hi Ian,
This is Audrey (from the ALARMS team). After copying your MIRs to our
system we are able to produce your problem.
The problem lies in the conversion of your DOMAIN name from FULLNAME to string.
The call SYS$DNSW fails with the status %DNS-E-INVALIDNAME, Invalid name.
I'm not a DNS expert and so I will try to get as much information as I
can together so I can ask someone who is and expert. Could you provide
me with any information on the versions of your DNS Clerk?
Thanks,
aud...
|
| 798.11 | | SUBURB::SMYTHI | Ian Smyth 830-3869 | Fri Mar 22 1991 12:12 | 14 |
|
Audrey,
I'm using a private namespace installed on the same system
as MCC.
$mc dns$control show version
Distributed Name Service - Version 1.1, Protocol Version 1.0
regards,
Ian
|
| 798.12 | Well folks, here is the patch, and yes thanks for waiting! | WAKEME::ANIL | | Tue Apr 23 1991 12:27 | 324 |
| 798.13 | One more time.. | WAKEME::ANIL | | Wed Apr 24 1991 17:08 | 27 |
| >>>$ line_2 = F$EXTRACT(0,f$length(line_2) - 3, line_2)
>>>$ image_dir = line_1
>>>$ line_2 = line_1+line_2+EXTN
>>>$ !
Well what can I say. I will just gracefully accept the
booboo. In .12 above, please replace the line
Old> $ line_2 = F$EXTRACT(0,f$length(line_2) - 3, line_2)
with
New> $ line_2 = f$parse(line_2,,,"NAME")
Sorry about that folks. In the the next note I have
included a new patch.com in case you prefer to just
deleting the old one.
BTW. Nothing bad will happen when you try to run
the patch.com from note .12. Just that no patch will
be applied!
Once again please accept my apologies...
- Anil Navkal
|
| 798.14 | And the correct patch.com is... | WAKEME::ANIL | | Wed Apr 24 1991 17:09 | 302 |
| $!==================================================================
$! PATCH.COM 24-APR-1991 15:10 Page 1
$!++
$!
$! PATCH.COM
$! 24-APR-1991 15:10
$!
$!===================================================================
$!Background:
$!==========
$!
$! In V1.1 DECmcc Alarms software has a bug which will cause
$! any one of the following symptoms:
$!
$! 1. Extract Rule does not extract all/some of the Alarms rule
$! from Alarms MIR. Following log indicates how a typical failure
$! looks:
$!
$! MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES
$! - Generating a Procedure to Rebuild the Alarms MIR
$! - Output File: MCC_ALARMS_RULES.COM
$! WRITE-PROCEDURE failed on step 2
$!
$! [ 0 ] (
$! [ 4 ] (
$! [ 3 ] (
$! [ 1 ] 03
$! [ 2 ] 54 68 65 20 76 61 6c 75 65 20 20 66
$!
$! :
$! :
$! :
$! )
$! )WRITE-PROCEDURE failed on step 2
$!
$! >>> EXIT - Alarms MIR extraction error ... MCC Status Code = 52875202
$!
$!
$! 2. A rule can be created but can not be Enabled successfully.
$!
$! 3. A rule can be enabled but does not stay enabled.
$! After one evaluation the rule is disabled.
$! 4. Rules are enabled but no notification takes place.
$!
$! Note
$! ----
$! We strongly recommend that you apply the following patch,
$! regardless of whether you have experienced the above behavior.
$!
$!
$!Saving old rules:
$!================
$!
$! If you have experienced the behavior as noted in 1. above, and
$! can still see the rules in alarms MIR, by issuing the following
$! command,
$!
$! MCC> SHOW DOMAIN * RULE * ALL CHAR, TO FILE saved_rules.com.
$!
$! The rules can later be restored converting SAVED_RULES.COM to
$! a MCC command procedure by editing it. You may want to do
$! this only if you want to save the existing rules in the Alarms MIR.
$!
$!How to Apply the patch:
$!======================
$!
$! Step 1:
$! ------
$! Appendix A has the actual patch. We recommend that the
$! Patch be applied from the system account. Please copy it in your
$! SYS$LOGIN directory as MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1.COM.
$!
$! Step 2:
$! ------
$! Run this command procedure (i.e. PATCH.COM).
$! It will apply the required patch.
$!
$!Side effects:
$!============
$!
$! Files renamed by patch
$! ----------------------
$!
$! Please note that the Patch will rename the following existing
$! files:
$!
$! MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_INSTANCE_MIR.DAT =>
$! MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_INSTANCE_MIR.DAT_OLD_V1_1
$!
$! MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_ATTRIBUTE_MIR.DAT =>
$! MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_ATTRIBUTE_MIR.DAT_OLD_V1_1
$!
$! SYS$LIBRARY:MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE;-1 =>
$! SYS$LIBRARY:MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE_OLD_V1_1
$!
$!
$! New MIR files for Alarms MIR
$! ----------------------------
$!
$! After the patch is applied Alarms will create a set of new MIR files
$! hence you will not be able to see you old rules in the repository.
$!
$!=============================================================================
$ !
$ verify = F$VERIFY(0)
$ any_file_name := ""
$ any_file_name = f$parse(any_file_name,"*.*;*")
$ file_spec = f$search("''any_file_name'")
$ current_dir = f$parse(file_spec,,,"device") + f$parse(file_spec,,,"directory")
$ !
$ On error then goto all_done
$ Assign sys$scratch:mcc_alarms_patch.tmp sys$output
$ Install list sys$library:mcc_alarms_fm
$ Deass sys$output
$ !
$ Open/read/err=file_read_error temp_file sys$scratch:mcc_alarms_patch.tmp
$ !
$ !------------------
$ get_new_line:
$ !------------------
$ Read/error=file_read_error/end_of_file=all_done temp_file data_line
$ If f$edit(data_line,"collapse") .eqs. "" then goto get_new_line
$ !
$ line_1 = data_line
$ read/error=file_read_error/end_of_file=go_ahead temp_file line_2
$ close temp_file
$ !
$ line_2 = f$edit(line_2,"COMPRESS,TRIM")
$ line_2 = F$ELEMENT(0," ",line_2)
$ EXTN = F$EXTRACT(f$length(line_1)-4, 4, line_1)
$ line_1 = F$EXTRACT(0,f$length(line_1) - 4, line_1)
$ line_2 = f$parse(line_2,,,"NAME")
$ image_dir = line_1
$ line_2 = line_1+line_2+EXTN
$ !
$ set message/nofacility/noseveri/notext/noident
$ !
$ analyze/image/out=sys$scratch:mcc_alarms_patch.tmp 'line_2
$ search/out=nl: sys$scratch:mcc_alarms_patch.tmp "There are no patches at this time"
$ !
$ if f$integer('$status') .eq. 1 then -
search/out=nl: sys$scratch:mcc_alarms_patch.tmp "link date/time: 28-FEB-1991 09:58"
$ !
$ stat = $STATUS
$ set message/facility/severi/text/ident
$ if f$integer('stat') .eq. 1
$ then
$ set def 'image_dir'
$ if f$search("sys$login:MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1.COM") .nes. ""
$ then
$ Copy/nolog sys$login:MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1.COM []
$ Patch @MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1
$ Install replace 'image_dir'mcc_alarms_fm.exe
$ Write sys$output " **************************************************************"
$ Write sys$output " * Image patched and replaced *"
$ Write sys$output " **************************************************************"
$ Delete/noconf/nolog MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1.COM;*
$ Rename/nolog MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_INSTANCE_MIR.DAT MCC_COMMON:*.DAT_OLD_V1_1
$ Rename/nolog MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_ATTRIBUTE_MIR.DAT MCC_COMMON:*.DAT_OLD_V1_1
$ Rename/nolog 'image_dir'MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE;-1 'image_dir'*.EXE_OLD_V1_1
$ else
$ write sys$output " Patch was required and MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1.COM was *not* found"
$ endif
$ else
$ write sys$output " Patch is *not* required"
$ endif
$ goto all_done
$ !------------------
$ file_read_error:
$ !------------------
$ write sys$output "Error reading ''temp_file'"
$!--------------------
$ all_done:
$!--------------------
$ delete/noconf/nolog sys$scratch:mcc_alarms_patch.tmp;*
$ set message/facility/severi/text/ident
$ set def 'current_dir
$ if verify .eq. 1 then Set Verify
$!==================================================================================
$ exit
$!==================================================================================
$!=====================================================================================
$!
$! APPENDIX A
$!
$! Please copy the following into SYS$LOGIN directory in the file
$! MCCBMS011_PATCH_ALARMS_1.COM
$!
$!=====================================================================================
MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE
SE EC
^X00000001
SE M
I
EXI
SE M
I
EXI
SE M
NOSY
EXI
RE /I
^X0000DA68
'MOVL @B^^X00000000(R4),R0'
EXIT
'NOP'
EXI
AL /PAG
NEW_CALL
INSE /I
^X0000DA68
'NOP'
'PUSHL B^^X00000008(AP)'
'CALLS #^X00000001,NEW_CALL'
'MOVL R0,R8'
'JMP L^^X0000DA73'
'NEW_CALL :NOP'
'NOP'
'SUBL2 #^X00000018,SP'
'CLRL R3'
'CLRL B^^X000000F8(FP)'
'CLRL R4'
'CLRL B^^X000000F4(FP)'
'MOVZWL #^X000001F8,-(SP)'
'PUSHL #^X00000001'
'CALLS #^X00000002,@L^^X00047F80'
'MOVL R0,R3'
'BEQL LBL1'
'PUSHAL B^^X000000F8(FP)'
'MOVL @B^^X00000004(AP),R0'
'MOVZWL (R0),-(SP)'
'PUSHL R3'
'PUSHL R0'
'CALLS #^X00000004,L^^X00025F90'
'MOVL R0,R4'
'BRB LBL2'
'LBL1 :MOVL #^X0326D162,R0'
'RET'
'LBL2 :CLRL B^^X000000F4(FP)'
'TSTL B^^X000000F8(FP)'
'BEQL LBL3'
'TSTL R0'
'NOP'
'LBL4 :MOVL B^^X000000F4(FP),R2'
'CVTBL (R3)[R2],-(SP)'
'CALLS #^X00000001,@L^^X000480A8'
'CVTLB R0,(R3)[R2]'
'INCL B^^X000000F4(FP)'
'CMPL B^^X000000F4(FP),B^^X000000F8(FP)'
'BLSSU LBL4'
'LBL3 :CMPL R4,#^X03268009'
'BNEQ LBL5'
'MOVL B^^X00000004(AP),R2'
'MOVW #^X00000192,@B^^X00000000(R2)'
'PUSHAL B^^X000000F4(FP)'
'PUSHL B^^X000000F8(FP)'
'PUSHL R3'
'PUSHL (R2)'
'CALLS #^X00000004,L^^X00037650'
'MOVL R0,R4'
'LBL5 :PUSHL R3'
'CALLS #^X00000001,@L^^X00047F70'
'MOVL R4,R0'
'RET'
EXI
RE /I
PAA+^X00000004
'CALLS #^X00000001,L^PAA'
EXIT
'CALLS #^X00000001,L^NEW_CALL'
EXI
SE M
NOI
EXI
D /W
NEW_CALL+^X00000000
^X0000001C
EXI
RE /I
^X00009F06
'BEQL ^X00009F20'
EXIT
'NOP'
EXI
INSE /I
^X00009F06
'NOP'
'CMPL B^^X000000F8(FP),#^X00000005'
'BNEQ P2LB1'
'MOVZWL #^X000001F8,B^^X000000F4(FP)'
'P2LB1 :TSTL B^^X000000F4(FP)'
'BEQL ^X00009F20'
EXI
RE /I
^X0000DA73
'MOVZWL B^^X00000008(R0),R2'
EXIT
'BRB ^X0000DAAD'
EXI
U
EXI
|
| 798.15 | Problem with EDT | SUBURB::SMYTHI | Ian Smyth 830-3869 | Fri May 03 1991 12:37 | 32 |
| I think I've found another problem.
If I create a rule with a large description ie
$ MANAGE/ENTERPRISE
CREATE MCC 0 ALARMS RULE G3_G6_RESETS -
EXPRESSION=(CHANGE_OF(BRIDGE REO.G3_G6 UNSOLICITED RESETS, -
*, *), AT EVERY 00:15:00), -
PROCEDURE=MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_BROADCAST_ALARM.COM, -
EXCEPTION HANDLER=MCC_COMMON:MCC_ALARMS_BROADCAST_EXCEPTION.COM, -
CATEGORY="Bridge Reset problem", -
DESCRIPTION="Whenever a LANbridge 150 or 200 encounters a -
serious internal problem it will reset itself. This may be caused -
by power glitches and/or deteriorating hardware. It this problem -
occurs frequently field service may need to be informed.", -
QUEUE="ALARMS$BATCH", -
PARAMETER="USER=SMYTH", -
perceived severity = Major, -
in Domain = Domains.Reading_Bridges
EDT cannot handle the MCC_ALARMS_RULES.COM produced by
MCC_ALARMS_EXTRACT_RULES.EXE. It fails with -
Error reading from input file
File name:$220$DIA1:[SMYTH]MCC_ALARMS_RULES.COM;24
%RMS-W-RTB, 268 byte record too large for user's buffer
TPU can handle the file OK. The problem seems to be when the
"Description =" line exceeds 255 characters.
|
| 798.16 | For a moment you scared me!
| BLAME::ANIL | | Fri May 03 1991 15:23 | 7 |
| I guess TPU is more powefull that EDT! Is it possible that EDT can not handle
varient record that are bigger than 255 chars?
A possible fix for alarms could be to sprinkle LRLF every 130 chars. But that
would be changing data! I rather document the restriction in release notes.
- Anil Navkal
|
| 798.17 | An EDT restriction -- not ALARMS | TOOK::ORENSTEIN | | Fri May 03 1991 15:42 | 8 |
|
I see this as an EDT restriction and not an MCC_ALARMS_FM restriction.
Thank you for mentioning the problem, but I don't think kind of error
belongs in the release notes.
aud...
|
| 798.18 | | TADLEY::SMYTHI | Ian Smyth 830-3869 | Sat May 04 1991 06:54 | 10 |
| > I see this as an EDT restriction and not an MCC_ALARMS_FM restriction.
Yes, but this is going to be a very common MCC operation (extracting
alarms to a file, modifying them and then reloading). If MCC users shouldn't
use EDT for this, then it should be documented somewhere.
regards,
Ian
|
| 798.19 | Batch Parameter Limit | NSSG::R_SPENCE | Nets don't fail me now... | Tue May 07 1991 12:39 | 9 |
| I don't think it is EDT that is having the problem.
I believe the problem to be the BATCH processor. It cannot handle
parameters that are longer than 256 (or is it 128) characters.
I found this in V1.0 field test and I was sure that this restriction
was documented even for the V1.0 product.
s/rob
|
| 798.20 | PATCH.COM doesn't work? | SNOC02::MISNETWORK | Take a byte | Tue May 21 1991 21:34 | 48 |
|
I tried installing the alarms patch mentioned in .13, but had some
problems as you can see below -
$ @patch
%DCL-W-NULFIL, missing or invalid file specification - respecify
%DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling
\MCC_ALARMS_FM\
%DCL-W-ABVERB, ambiguous command verb - supply more characters
\SE\
%DCL-W-NOCOMD, no command on line - reenter with alphabetic first character
%DCL-W-ABVERB, ambiguous command verb - supply more characters
\SE\
%DCL-W-ABVERB, ambiguous command verb - supply more characters
\I\
**************************************************************
* Image patched and replaced *
**************************************************************
%RENAME-E-SEARCHFAIL, error searching for
DISK$SYSDISK:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE;-1
-RMS-E-FNF, file not found
$ dir mcc_common:mcc_alarms*.dat*
Directory DISK$USERDISK2:[MCC]
MCC_ALARMS_ATTRIBUTE_MIR.DAT_OLD_V1_1;1 MCC_ALARMS_INSTANCE_MIR.DAT_OLD_V1_1;1
Total of 2 files.
$ dir sys$library:mcc_alarm*
Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]
MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE;2
Total of 1 file.
Looking at the patch command file, it looks as though the line that
that picks out the MCC_ALARMS_FM.EXE file is wrong, so the first
analyze doesn't work. I decided to do the patch by hand after making
sure I knew what was going on. Has anyone else had this problem ! It
sure send a chill up your spine when you see it bomb out and you are
not sure what it has done.
Cheers,
Louis
|
| 798.21 | I am not sure which patch you used ... | TOOK::ORENSTEIN | | Wed May 22 1991 14:23 | 19 |
|
Hi Louis,
>> I tried installing the alarms patch mentioned in .13, but had some
>> problems as you can see below -
Your choices for patches was .12 or .14
.12 has a BUG!
.14 is the CORRECT patch. << -- Use This One!
.13 is a description of the bug and how you could patch the patch.
Please be sure you use note .14 for doing your patch. You will also
find the correct version of the patch in note 3.73
Please let us know if note 3.73 does NOT work for you. It should :)
aud...
|