I agree with you,

some of the important documented options of centralized control are
missing in this V3.1 release!

Dommage, even if a great improvement over V2 can be seen.

IBM: what are your plans, do we get them next?

Regards,

Rene Lambelet, Nestle, VEVEY

>-----Original Message-----
>From:  William Ball [SMTP:wball AT KENT DOT EDU]
>Sent:  Monday, December 22, 1997 4:16 PM
>To:    ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
>Subject:       Re: version 3 issues
>
>> Does the "trial version" of ADSM on the web have all the functionality
>> that the ordered version has? If not, that might explain some of the
>> flakey problems we've had during the install and testing, if it IS the
>> same it appears to be a rather "dirty" GA release not to mention a real
>> let down when it comes to the centralized options.
>>
>> Problems:
>>
>> o You can't tell SMIT to install the server piece. When you do you end
>> up with 0
>>      authorized users. It must be installed one piece at a time and that
>> isn't spelled out
>>      in the installation instructions.
>>
>> o My client piece has been installed 3 times, from scratch, with release
>> 2 completely
>>     off the system and it still can't seem to find a lot of the help
>> datasets even though
>>      they are where they belong.
>>
>> o The centralized options don't include ALL the options needed nor do
>> they include
>>      a way to ADD options that were ommitted from the list. The options
>> doc, says
>>      you can have INCLUDE and EXCLUDE statements but the centralized
>> selections
>>       only include a way to name the dataset that has the
>> include/exclude statements.
>>      So, unless there is a way to TRICK adsm into accepting options like
>>
>>      ERRORLOGRETENTION, the main control for the options file will still
>> have to be
>>       on the clients machine.
>>
>> o The BACKUP estimator runs out of memory (32M) and hangs the client at
>> just over
>>     99K datasets selected. And it appears to have an odd option. You can
>> BACKUP
>>      what is on the server AND client but the RESTORE doesn't include
>> the server.
>>
>> In a few weeks we are going to grow our client base by 600 and the plan
>> is the same for the next 3 years. Before we drop something like release
>> 3 on our users, I'd like to get a warm and fuzzy that we aren't going to
>> face a nightmare. If the release really is this dirty, we'll likely be
>> forced to go with release 2 and upgrade them when the bugs get ironed
>> out.
>>
>> Any information you can share, would be appreciated.
>>
>> --
>>
>>     Bill Ball
>>    Email: WBALL AT KENT DOT EDU
>>
>>      ()_()   ()*()
>>       (_)     (_)
>>
>> Have a Disney day.
>
>
>
>--