[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

4605.0. "DNS-E-NONSRESOURCES" by TPSP11::SYSTEM () Thu Feb 25 1993 05:28

Hi,

The config. is VMS5.4-2 + MCCEMS 2.2 + DNS V1.1.

I met DNS-E-NONSRESOURCES error when registering p4 nodes with many
lines and circuits(more than 45). When I use p4 autoconfigure, I found
some nodes get this error during registeration phase and they all have
many async. ddcmp lines, and these nodes were only partially registered.
When look into these nodes I can't see line and circuit subentities in the map.

For other nodes with fewer lines/circuits, registeration just work fine!
The nodes with many async ddcmp lines are all running VMS5.4 or 5.4-2.

I have checked/increased quotas of DNS$TA, DNS$BACK, DNS$ADVER processes 
and I am sure there is no dynamic memory resource problem in VMS and there
is no any 352.*, 353.* event. MCC_AUDIT also no compalint.

Some DNS$SERVER account's quota/limit are

BYTLM=100000
FILLM=150
PGFLQUOTA=100000
BIOLM=100
DIOLM=100
TQELM=300
ASTLM=200
ENQLM=2500


Any idea? Thanks for any reply!

Norbert    
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
4605.1DNS V1.1 has record size limitationsKAJUN::NELSONThu Feb 25 1993 08:4110
You are probably running into a hard limitation of DNS V1.1.  DECmcc
stores the children as part of the parent object in DNS.  DNS V1.* uses
one RMS record per object.  There is a hard limitation on how big an RMS
record can be (I think 16k bytes or some such).  You may want to upgrade
to a newer DNS (V2.0?) which has a different implementation. 

Anyway this is probably why entities with fewer numbers of children 
register OK, but not entites with larger numbers of children.

...kjn
4605.2local MIRTPSP11::SYSTEMFri Feb 26 1993 03:1011
    re.-1
    
    Thanks for your reply!
    
    How about local MIR?  I met a autoconfiguration problem when upgraded
    to dns2.0 for my own VAX, as describe in note 4604, which prevent me 
    from upgrading dns for my customer.
    
    Norbert