I agree!
I am the primary ADSM admin, managing 3 servers that do backups for
several different LANs serving many different departments with many
different flavors of UNIX and WIndows machines.
One of the neat things about ADSM in general, is that the humans
administering the LANs can easily learn to do most things on their own
by using the icons, without much training or startup cost. They do the
installs on the Windows and AIX servers in other physical locations,
that I don't have access to.
On the other hand, there is a very powerful command line interface that
I can use for automating the more complex stuff.
There is DEFINITELY a need for both icon-driven and batch mode tools.
Thanks Pete!
> ----------
> From: Jerry Lawson[SMTP:jlawson AT thehartford DOT com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 1998 8:44 AM
> To: ADSM-L AT vm.marist DOT edu
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
>
> ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes
> ---------------------------
> From: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/16/98 3:50PM
> To: Jerry Lawson at ASUPO
> *To: *ADSM-L at SNADGATE
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> Pete -
>
> I don't want to assume that I am speaking for the whole list, but I do
> know
> that I will certainly appreciate having the menu driven interface
> back.
>
> Although we have not tried to use automation tools to do the
> installation of
> the ADSM code, I am aware of the issues that surround the process. A
> tool
> like DSMCUTIL that can run in a batch mode is a definite plus for
> these
> folks, as you well know. At my shop, we have distributed the
> installation
> process to local LAN administrators, who usually do the process
> manually.
> So, an interactive tool that "walks them through" the process (like
> DSMCSVCI
> did) is of value to us.
>
> When I attended GUIDE, we used to have a "prize" we would give out
> from time
> to time called the "William Tell Near Miss" award. (By the way, my
> tongue is
> firmly planted in my cheek, right now.) The idea behind it was that
> if a
> developer released something, and it was way off mark (missed the
> apple by a
> mile) - no one would complain, because the tool didn't meet anyone's
> needs
> and wouldn't be used at all. In fact, all would hail it's
> replacement. But
> if the developer missed the mark by just an inch or two - perhaps,
> straight
> down ;-) then the impact is significant, and the impact to the user
> is
> greatest. We never had an official "prize" for this award, but there
> was one
> individual (who had won the award himself) who had a broken Anvil that
> he
> talked about donating - but he didn't want to carry it to a meeting!
> (Do you
> know how hard it is to break an anvil?!)
>
> At any rate, Pete, thanks for taking the time to reinstate the
> DSMCSVCI
> utility - I believe many others will join me in thanking you for it.
> But
> don't think for a moment that DSMCUTIL was a mistake - there are many
> others
> that will thank you just as much for providing it.
>
> Jerry Lawson
> jlawson AT thehartford DOT com
>
>
> ______________________________ Forward Header
> __________________________________
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
> Author: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/16/98 3:50 PM
>
>
> Ok, after seeing all of the complaints about removing the menu
> interface
> (dsmcsvci) for installing the scheduler service from version 3 I have
> decided to
> rewrite it and put it out on the ftp server. My original intent is
> providing
> the command line only interface (dsmcutil) was to provide a batch
> mode/non-interactive capability that many of our larger customers had
> been
> requesting/demanding. The utility was also rewritten to allow
> installing/configuring multiple services on the same machine. Our
> ultimate goal
> is provide a true GUI interface in addition to the current command
> line
> interface but due to time and resource constraints I don't see being
> available
> until later this year, so I will provide the console mode menu
> interface for
> now. I will post an append on the list server when the menu interface
> is
> available on our ftp server (should be about a week or so).
>
> Pete Tanenhaus
> ADSM NT Development
> ---------------------- Forwarded by Pete Tanenhaus/San Jose/IBM on
> 02/16/98
> 11:47 AM ---------------------------
>
> ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> 02/16/98 10:37 AM
> Please respond to ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU @ internet
>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU @ internet
> cc:
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
>
> ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes
> ---------------------------
> From: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/16/98 11:23AM
> To: Jerry Lawson at ASUPO
> *To: *ADSM-L at SNADGATE
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> Cindy -
>
> I agree about the Originator being a pain - the Activity Log browser
> is
> probably one of the three most often used parts of the admin client.
> I
> reinstalled just the client (actually, I restored it, and the
> associated TXT
> file to a separate directory, and then copied in the DSM.OPT, added an
> icon
> to the start menu, and I was in business. Actually, while I really
> like the
> ability to resize the panels and have them remembered, I didn't see
> all that
> much new in the admin client.
>
> I also found a nasty little bug in the scheduler events query - you
> can't ask
> to just see the admin events - it gives you every scheduled event for
> the
> period requested. I don't want to pick through 700+ client schedules
> to see
> the half dozen admin activities I'm interested in.
>
> Jerry Lawson
> jlawson AT thehartford DOT com
>
>
> ______________________________ Forward Header
> __________________________________
>
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
> Author: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/16/98 11:23 AM
>
>
> Fortunately, someone had placed a brief blurb about a BAT file he had
> written for the 3.1 scheduler last week --- I took this and expanded
> it to
> include more of the options described in the documentation, and was
> able to
> get the scheduler to load as well as work automatically. It ran
> without a
> hitch all weekend in unattended mode, but I hope I don't have to run
> it in
> interactive mode any time soon (looks a little unfriendly).
>
> And the ORIGINATOR problem is truly a pain --- I really don't want to
> reload v2 again because I do like the look and ease of use with the
> v3.11
> client, but may entertain the idea if the machines really get bogged
> down.
> Hopefully IBM will get the fix for this out soon.
>
> C.L.Cannam
> Storage Management
> GENAM/St. Louis, MO/USA
>
>
>
>
> Jerry Lawson <jlawson AT THEHARTFORD DOT COM> on 02/16/98 07:22:33 AM
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc: (bcc: Cindy Cannam)
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes
> ---------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> From: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/13/98 12:38PM
> To: Jerry Lawson at ASUPO
> *To: *ADSM-L at SNADGATE
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> ----
> The invalid Parameter ORIGINATOR is a bug in the V3 client - it is a
> parm
> used on a V3 server, but is obviously not compatible with a V2 server.
> There
> has been an APAR taken on it. Hopefully, this will be in the Level 3
> fixes
> when they came out. I had to reinstall the V2 admin client to get
> around
> this.
> As for the scheduler service installation, I hope it works well in
> unattended
> mode, because it sure is a pain to use interactively. I still have a
> copy
> of
> DSMCSVCI, which still works.
>
> Jerry Lawson
> jlawson AT thehartford DOT com
>
> ______________________________ Forward Header
> __________________________________
> Subject: Re: NT scheduler install in V3R1
> Author: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/13/98 12:38 PM
>
> I, too, agree with you on the latest NT scheduler service! I
> downloaded the
> latest single-byte executables for v3r1.1 (to make certain I received
> the
> newest fix, etc.), but had a terrible time trying to get the DSMCUTIL
> to
> bring up the scheduler. I fortunately had NOT deleted my v3r.1 files
> (just
> renamed them and placed them in a different directory), but even when
> I
> tried to fall back to the old scheduler (which probably won't work
> with the
> newest version anyway), I was unable to get the machine to start a
> schedule
> automatically. And, on top of all that, the activity log in the new
> version
> kept giving me an error code I couldn't locate in any of the
> documentation:
> ANS8500I (an invalid parameter called ORIGINATOR was causing a problem
> for
> the log in some fashion, but gave me no hints about its location or
> how to
> repair it). It was a frustrating afternoon! I'll be interested to see
> what
> answers we receive!
> C.L.Cannam
> Storage Management
> GENAM/St. Louis, MO/USA
>
>
>
> David Killingsworth <david_w_killingsworth AT AMOCO DOT COM> on 02/12/98
> 06:38:38
> PM
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc: (bcc: Cindy Cannam)
> Subject: NT scheduler install in V3R1
>
>
>
> I have about 25 installs of V2.1.06 client in place and have had
> them
> in place for over a year. Originally they were OS/2, but I
> slowly
>
>
>
>
>
> migrated them to NT. I thought it was great to be able to run
> ADSM
> Scheduler as a service. The service was pretty easy to install.
> I just upgraded one of my machines from V2.1.06 to V3.1.1. I
> completely uninstalled the old version of the backup/archive
> client.
> After I did the new install, I couldn't figure out how to install
> the
> scheduler service. Why was the neat little menu option taken
> away.
> Secondly, why did they take away the easy to use executible.
> I had to fumble around trying to get the right parameters before
> I
> could install the service even with the scarce help using the
> dsmcutil
> executible. When I finally did get it installed I did not
> understand
> that the service name I was giving would be what it would
> actually be
> called. I thought it was asking for the service executible.
> Consequently, my first attempt at installing the service ended up
> being
> dsmcsvc in my services panel. Removing it was just as difficult.
> WHY????? That is my question. Why make it harder than in a
> previous
> release.
>
|
