ADSM-L

Re: Bug? Using multiple client service instances on Windows server

2005-02-14 20:28:41
Subject: Re: Bug? Using multiple client service instances on Windows server
From: TSM_User <tsm_user AT YAHOO DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 17:28:25 -0800
We have over 20 Windows 2000 Cluster servers. On all of these servers we have 
to create 2 sets of all the services. One for the local drive and one for the 
cluster.  We have never run into the issue you are speaking of.  We use the 
dsmcutil command to create all our servers via scripting.  The only issue I 
have ever seen is that if you don't use the short 8.3 name for the path for 
"/clientdir" then you can have problems.

I'm not sure if this will help but here is an example of what we use.
ex:
"C:\Program Files\Tivoli\TSM\Baclient\DSMCUTIL" Install /name:"TSM Central 
Scheduler" /node:%COMPUTERNAME% /clientdir:C:\Progra~1\Tivoli\TSM\Baclient 
/optfile:C:\Progra~1\Tivoli\TSM\Baclient\dsm.opt /pass:%COMPUTERNAME% 
/startnow:no /autostart:no

One thing I have noticed is if you ever create services on a cluster you must 
ensure that you create them adding the /clustername and /clusternode options.  
Also, you have to use the /clusternode:no for the services you create that 
aren't for the cluster.  Finally you also have to make sure that you create the 
cluster services first.  If you don't do this correctly you will get errors but 
they aren't all as clear as I would like.

Paul Fielding <paul AT FIELDING DOT CA> wrote:
Several years ago I noticed an interesting behavior when installing multiple 
client scheduler services on a server. A ticket was opened with IBM and the 
final word came back that there was indeed a bug, the apar was opened, and we 
were told it would be resolved. This week I've encoutered the same situation, 
so I'm wondering if anyone has also noticed this behavior? I no longer have the 
apar number of the original ticket, so I can't check to see the apar's status.

When installing a scheduler service (with apropriate cad, etc) you must supply 
the dsm.opt file fo the service to use. For the first nodename on the server, 
this is typically the Tivoli\TSM\baclient\dsm.opt file. When installing the 
second set of services for an alternate nodename, you must supply an alternate 
dsm.opt file.

If you run a dsmadmc -console while starting the CAD, you may notice that, when 
the scheduler service contacts the TSM Server, it touches the server twice. 
Under normal circumstances, this is just something I shrugged off as an 
'interesting' thing.

However, after the second service instance is installed, when starting up the 
CAD, I noticed that the the first of those two connections was using the wrong 
nodename - instead of connecting to the TSM server with the nodename of the 
second service, it connected with the nodename of the first service. The second 
connection attempt then proceeded to use the correct nodename. Not knowing 
exactly what information is sent on each of those connections, I do not know 
the implications of this.

Basically what was happening was that when the scheduler service first starts 
it grabbed the default dsm.opt location, instead of using the dsm.opt file 
defined for that service. By the time it makes it's second connection attempt, 
it's read the correct dsm.opt file.

The temporary band-aid was to configure the first scheduler service to use a 
*non-standard* dsm.opt - the result being that when the second service tried to 
connect using the default location, it failed to find a dsm.opt file there, and 
simply connected sucessfully on the second attempt, using the correct dsm.opt 
file.

More recently, I've noticed that when this situation occurs, if you set the 
first service to use a non-standard dsm.opt file, during the install process I 
initially get an error message stating that the service 'Could not find 
c:\Program Files\Tivoli\TSM\baclient\dsm.opt' , even though that's not the 
dsm.opt file I told it to read. The service then goes and sucessfully installs. 
*shrug*.

It doesn't appear to be causing any real grief, but I'm wondering if I'm the 
only one seeing this behavior or not, and if anyone may know of any genuine 
grief this could cause?

regards,

Paul

                
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'