| Title: | ACMS comments and questions |
| Notice: | This is not an official software support channel. Kits 5.* |
| Moderator: | CLUSTA::HALL AN |
| Created: | Mon Feb 17 1986 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 4179 |
| Total number of notes: | 15091 |
Hello All,
I have a customer who executes a ACMS/ENTER and upon this command
gets a SYSTEM-F-VECFULL error condition. The application consists
of a DECforms form which gets cached from the application node. The
DECforms form does not have the corresponding ESCAPE ROUTINE linked
into it - this has been manually located on the submitter node and
is pointed to by the FORMS$IMAGE logical name. The ESCAPE ROUTINE
performs functions in privledged mode.
To make a long story short the dispatch message vector is full and
this is the cause of the SYSTEM-F-VECFULL error condition. Additional
investigation of CPs table thru SDA shows that duplicated entries
in the message dispatch vector are present.
My question deals with the multithreaded nature of the CP in this
context - specifically is there a one for one correspondence between
the MIN_CPIS parameter at the CP level and the amount of space/entries
made into the dispatch message vector?
Would including the ESCAPE ROUTINE in the shareable form reduce the
space requirements in the dispatch message vector?
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4101.1 | OHMARY::HALL | Bill Hall - ACMS Engineering - ZKO2-2 | Wed Feb 12 1997 14:22 | 44 | |
MIN_CPIS has nothing to do with the dispatch vector table. The
thread package in CP (called THD) has a preset number of thread
table entries. This is a compile time value, it used to be 100,
I think it's now a little higher, but all it does is change
the size of the thread table.
Each user that enters ACMS through ACMS/ENTER has a CPI (which
stands for Command Processor Interpreter) thread on which they
execute.
The MAX_TTS_CP and MIN_CPIS parameters are TSC parameters. When
a user does an ACMS/ENTER, The TSC looks for a place to put that
user. If a CP is already at the number specified by MAX_TTS_CP,
then it will lokk elsewhere or may startup another CP.
MIN_CPIS comes into play as users log into ACMS. For example,
if MAX_TTS_CP is set to 20, and PERM_CPS is set to 1, there
are 20 CPI threads available. As users log in, this counter
is decremented (not really but think of it that way). When
the number of free CPI threads equals MIN_CPIS, the TSC will
start another CP.
The error message your customer is seeing, VECFULL says:
Facility: SYSTEM, System Services
Explanation: This severe error message is associated with a status code
returned from a system service request. The privileged vector
limit of 42 is exceeded.
User Action: Remove unnecessary vectors and relink.
It sort of sounds like they are activating too many images or
activating them incorrectly. If the images are installed images, you
should only see 1 copy of them in CP's virtual address space. If they
are activating them by filename and specifying a version #, then this
will bypass the known file list lookup and will probably result in individual
activations.
Bill
| |||||
| 4101.2 | IFDL::RICE | Thu Feb 13 1997 06:58 | 6 | ||
We've seen problems like this in the past where they are placing DECforms extracted forms into images. The common problem seen is too many of these images, i.e. they make an image for each form. By grouping many forms into one image they can work around the, rather small, vector table limit on VAX. -Tim | |||||
| 4101.3 | CSC32::C_BENNETT | Thu Feb 13 1997 08:55 | 12 | ||
This is on an Alpha and works fine when the form doesn't get cached
between a OpenVMS 6.2 to OpenVMS 6.1 system. The ESCAPE ROUTINE
performs priv code and is not apart of the form so it is manually
copied to the OpenVMS 6.1 system. The ESCAPE ROUTINE was linked
under OpenVMS 6.1.
The odd issue is that further examination of the dispatch message
vector reveals duplicated entries - this originally made me think
1 thread - 1 duplication? I suppose if the customer pushes this
I'll just SPR the issue and have you guys look into it.
Thanks alot
| |||||