Networker

Re: [Networker] incompatibilities between different Networker versions

2003-01-07 08:50:18
Subject: Re: [Networker] incompatibilities between different Networker versions
From: Davina Treiber <treiber AT HOTPOP DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 08:48:21 -0500
On Tue, 7 Jan 2003 07:49:29 -0500, Jim Lane <JLane AT TORONTOHYDRO DOT COM> 
wrote:

>At the risk of precipitating a flame war,
Quite a strong risk I'd say. Constructive comments and criticism are much
more welcome on this list than emotional points of view.

> I couldn't agree more about the
>poor quality and design of Legato Networker. it has always struck me
>as a low-end PC grade product with delusions of grandeur.
Quite the opposite in fact. As you know, NetWorker's roots are in the Unix
world, a world where TCP/IP and DNS have been second nature since way back.
NetWorker was designed before Microsoft had even invented TCP/IP. (What do
you mean they didn't?) Introducing NetWorker to Windows produced infinitely
more ways of breaking the product as it was used in more varied environments.

> it's design seems to be based on the assumption that everything else
> in the environment
> works perfectly all the time and when it doesn't it's somehow OK for
> Networker to just roll over and quit after printing an incomprehensible
> message.
It's a network based product. For it to work properly, surely you have to
have a working network. That includes name resolution, however you choose to
do it. It's not OK for it to do what you said, however it's rare that it
does that, and your opinion of what constitutes an incomprehensible message
may not be the same as other peoples. Anyway, that's what Support is for.
Occasionally a product as complex as this, by its very nature, is going to
be used in some strange set of circumstances, but quite often someone has
seen it before.

> having just gotten back on support after a 2-year hiatus I've
>now discovered, wonder of wonders, that my problem is fixed in the
>next release!
Perhaps Support would have been a good idea to help you with your 2-year old
version of the product. They could have told you that 6.0 is a bad version
and that 6.0.1 and above fixes a particularly nasty media DB bug. If you
chose not to pay for support why are you surprised not to know about any
particular fix?

> in the meanwhile the workaround is to stop using DNS
>and put static hosts files on all 140+ clients! I'm not sure whether
>to laugh or cry.
Well I don't know your issue here, but I have never seen a case where hosts
files were the only solution. Many sites with broken or badly implemented
DNS systems see better results with hosts files, however the true solution
would be to fix the DNS. This is not always possible in the short term, but
in many cases the customer did not even know their DNS was broken until
NetWorker showed up the problem.

 I wish I was lucky enough to be able to say that this is
>my last year using Networker, but that would involve somebody
>admitting they'd made a mistake. sigh.
That's if they have made a mistake. Sure there are competing products (not
many in this class though) but each of them comes with its own selection of
bugs and issues, perhaps different to the ones in NetWorker, but equally
troublesome and annoying. NetWorker IS a mature product these days, and the
problems with current versions are minor compared to some that have gone in
the past. However, fixing bugs is an iterative process and you cannot see
the benefit unless you install the versions containing the fixes. All
software products are like this.

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=