Conference azur::mcc

    
    This is a complete shot in the dark, but I experienced similar problems
    for the entire reports package when I had a logical defined called
    MCC_EXPORT which pointed to the database file name and had a database
    collection using the default name MCC_EXPORT (as per the installation
    instructions).  Any chance there may be a logical name that matches the
    relation name of the data collection?
    
    Also have you checked that the data collection relation is actually
    defined?
    
    ie.		
    
    MC RDO
    RDO> INVOKE DATABASE FILE DKA300:[MCC_EXPORT]EXPORT.RDB
    RDO> SHOW RELATIONS
    User Relations in Database with filename DKA300:[MCC_EXPORT]EXPORT.RDB
         MCC_NODE4
         MCC_NODE4_CIRCUIT
         MCC_NODE4_LINE
    RDO>
    
    
    Dave

Hi Dave,

Here's what I have for logicals:

 sh log *exp*

(LNM$PROCESS_TABLE)

(LNM$JOB_8104C620)

(LNM$GROUP_000100)

(LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)

  "MCC_EXPORTER_FM_STACK" = "128"
  "MCC_EXPORT_RDB_FILE" = "PUB:[MCC_RDB_DATA]MCC_EXPORT_FILE.RDB"
  "NETCW$EXPORT_LIBRARY" = "SYS$SYSTEM:NETCW$EXPORT_LIBRARY"
  "NETCW$EXPORT_NETWORK" = "SYS$SYSTEM:NETCW$EXPORT_NETWORK"
  "UCX$EXPORT" = "SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE]UCX$EXPORT.DAT;1"

(DECW$LOGICAL_NAMES)


And for the database side:

 mc rdo
RDO> INVOKE DATABASE FILE mcc_export_rdb_file
RDO> sho relations
User Relations in Database with filename mcc_export_rdb_file
     MCC_NODE
     MCC_NODE_MODEM_CONNECT_LINE
     MCC_NODE_ROUTING_CIRCUIT
RDO>

Question.....why is the canned procedure provided by DECmcc looking for
MCC_NODE_HDLC.....

Sorry for my ignorance, but should this string have shown up as a relation
when the above command was issued to RDO?

Al

    
    Al -
    
    Yes, I think it should show up as a relation.  The reason (and now we
    will push the limits of my database knowledge -- already) is as
    follows:
    
    Here is an excerpt from the NODE4_LINE_BANDWIDTH_RPT DTR procedure
    (from the file MCC_RPTS_PROC.DTR)
    
    
    DELETE NODE4_LINE_BANDWIDTH_RPT;
    REDEFINE PROCEDURE NODE4_LINE_BANDWIDTH_RPT
    !
    DECLARE NODE_HOLD        PIC X(7).
    DECLARE LINE_HOLD1      COMPUTED BY FN$UPCASE(LINE).
    DECLARE LINE_HOLD       PIC X(16).
    DECLARE DATE1_HOLD      USAGE DATE EDIT_STRING X(23).
    DECLARE DATE2_HOLD      USAGE DATE EDIT_STRING X(23).
    DECLARE TODAY_HOLD      USAGE DATE      DEFAULT "TODAY".
    !
    ! Translate logical names.
    !
    NODE_HOLD = FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$NODE1")
    !
    !
    LINE_HOLD = FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$LINE1")
    !
    DATE1_HOLD = FN$DATE(FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$DATE1"))
    !
    DATE2_HOLD = FN$DATE(FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$DATE2"))
    !
    !FILE_NAME  = FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$REPORT_FILE")
    SET COLUMNS_PAGE = 132
    !
    READY  MCC_EXPORT SHARED READ
>>> FIND  MCC_NODE4_LINE WITH TIME_STAMP BETWEEN DATE1_HOLD AND DATE2_HOLD
    IF NODE_HOLD NE "ALL"
            THEN FIND CURRENT WITH NODE4 = NODE_HOLD
    
    This is the relation that holds the counter data for phase IV lines
    
    
    Here is the similar excerpt from the Phase V procedure for HDLC
    
    DELETE NODE5_HDLC_BANDWIDTH_RPT;
    REDEFINE PROCEDURE node5_HDLC_BANDWIDTH_RPT
    !
    DECLARE NODE_HOLD        PIC X(100).
    DECLARE NODE_HOLD1      COMPUTED BY FN$UPCASE(NODE).
    DECLARE LINE_HOLD1      COMPUTED BY FN$UPCASE(LINK).
    DECLARE LINE_HOLD       PIC X(60).
    DECLARE DATE1_HOLD      USAGE DATE EDIT_STRING X(23).
    DECLARE DATE2_HOLD      USAGE DATE EDIT_STRING X(23).
    DECLARE TODAY_HOLD      USAGE DATE      DEFAULT "TODAY".
    DECLARE EXP_CVR_COMPUTED  COMPUTED BY
    CHOICE (EXP_CVR_STATISTICS = 1) THEN 1
      ELSE  0
       END_CHOICE.
    !
    ! Translate logical names.
    !
    NODE_HOLD = FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$NODE1")
    !
    !
    LINE_HOLD = FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$LINE1")
    !
    !
    DATE1_HOLD = FN$DATE(FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$DATE1"))
    !
    DATE2_HOLD = FN$DATE(FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$DATE2"))
    !
    !FILE_NAME  = FN$TRANS_LOG("MCC$REPORT_FILE")
    SET COLUMNS_PAGE = 132
    !
    READY  MCC_EXPORT SHARED READ
>>> FIND  mcc_node_HDLC WITH TIME_STAMP BETWEEN DATE1_HOLD AND DATE2_HOLD
    IF NODE_HOLD NE "ALL"
            THEN FIND CURRENT WITH NODE_HOLD1 containing NODE_HOLD
    
    
    This would be the corresponding relation for HDLC links or lines or
    whatever they call 'em now.  Therefore I believe that that this data
    collection should be there and associated with this relation name. 
    Have you registered as a child entity and exported from a line that is
    defined as a HDLC link?  It may not create the relation otherwise.
    
    Soon to be over his head...
    
    Dave
    

	Al,
  
  A message
   
>:node5_hdlc_bandwidth_rpt
>"MCC_NODE_HDLC" is not a readied source, collection, or list.

 usually tells that report tries to access a table (or relation) with name 
 "MCC_NODE_HDLC".
 This table is created by Exporter ONLY IF you export Node Hdlc entity.

  Just a note:

  It looks like you expect to export data into a file 
  PUB:[MCC_RDB_DATA]MCC_EXPORT_FILE.RDB.
  I think that in your case the Exporter creates MCC_EXPORT_RDB_FILE.RDB file 
  in the current directory.
  If you want an "export target" argument to be a default specified by a
  MCC_EXPORT_RDB_FILE logical DO NOT specify this argument in the Export
  (and any others) command.
  
	SAm
    

Dave,

I hope your not suggesting that each router needs to specifically have
each of its child entities (routing circuits, modem connect lines, etc)
individually registered?

The other question that I have is....why is the datatrieve procedure
worrying about HDLC anything?

The entity that contains the PDU's on a line by line basis is ROUTING CIRCUIT
and not MODEM CONNECT LINE or HDLC LINK.

Can anyone confirm this and can anyone confirm that the Datatrieve procedure
is written to pickup counters from HDLC things and not ROUTINT CIRCUITS?

Thanks,
Al

    
    Al -
    
    At this point I may be mistaken due to faulty memory, but I thought I
    recalled that to get utilization reports, etc. the child entity in
    question had to be registered and the speed had to be set.  I set this
    stuff up ~1 year ago and since it has not failed, I haven't dealt with
    it since.  One may not have to register the circuit or line or whatever
    to do this.  I do not wish to mislead, so I hope someone can clarify
    this.
    
    Dave