T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
5356.1 | more info = Need help! | ABACUS::BUKOWSKI | | Wed Jul 21 1993 10:28 | 14 |
| more info:...
After playing around a bit more, I have found that the 90 second
pause is not relavent when only asking for one group of attributes
(IE: counters). So when showing all attributes, the AM must ignore
the fact that the station is unavailable, and it continues to send
the all queries needed to provide all attributes. Wow. What a hog.
Can somebody please fix this. Whenever I enter a QAR, the engineering
folks just seem to ignore me.
Thanks,
CNS-NH Network Management,
Mike Bukowski
|
5356.2 | | TOOK::MCPHERSON | Imagine whirled peas. | Wed Jul 21 1993 10:41 | 7 |
| While things may not happen as fast as you'd like (or maybe even at
all), I'd still guess that your chances at getting something fixed are
much better via the QAR route than they are by posting color commentary
("Wow. What a hog.") in a notes conference.
regards,
doug
|
5356.3 | QAR 286 | ABACUS::BUKOWSKI | | Wed Jul 21 1993 14:09 | 2 |
| Ok. I entered QAR # 286.
|
5356.4 | Use specific partition | HADRES::KRAUSE | European NewProductEngineer for MCC | Fri Jul 23 1993 11:19 | 14 |
| > I perform a "show station aa-00-04-00-03-f0 all attr" to a station
The 'all attributes' is causing the problem. This includes all
partitions for this entity and the AM is asked to try each of them, one
after the other (IDENTIFIERS, STATUS, COUNTERS, CHARACTERISTICS). That
leads to 4 times the timeout and matches with what you are experiencing.
If possible try specifying only one partition, e.g. IDENTIFIERS. This
should speed things up by a factor of 4.
The timeout itself seems to be hardcoded and is a bit long in my
opinion. Any comments from engineering on this?
*Robert
|
5356.5 | QAR and timeout. | MOLAR::MOLAR::BRIENEN | Network Management Applications! | Mon Jul 26 1993 11:32 | 12 |
| Mike's QAR has been closed (with a description similar to the first part
of note 5356.4).
Since the timeout and retry count is not settable, the timeout value
selected was considered the best compromise.
Note that the time to wait for timeout is also affected by:
1. the number of addresses (up to 2: Address + Alternate Address)
2. number of ethernet ports on the host system
Chris
|