ADSM-L

Creating 4 Schedulers on one client

1999-09-28 16:37:35
Subject: Creating 4 Schedulers on one client
From: Kyle Payne <payne AT BERBEE DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 15:37:35 -0500
ADSMers,

        I have an NT client that has 1,200,000 + small files.  It takes 9 hours 
to
process the directory structures (found this out from tracing).  We decided
to create 4 separate schedule services each tied to a separate dsm.opt file.
Each file would have different values for the domain option (we are breaking
the box up by UNC shares).  Right now only one of the 4 scheduler services
is getting contacted.  We want to use schedmode prompted and we want to use
the same nodename for each scheduler service.  The server is at V3.1.2.40
and the client is at V3.1.0.7.

        I have 4 separate folders created under the BACLIENT folder, Scheduler 
1,
Scheduler 2, Scheduler 3, and Scheduler 4.  In each I placed the 3 files
needed in the /clientdir: optoin (dsmcsvc.exe, dscameng.txt, and dsm.opt).
I altered each dsm.opt file to reflect different domain values.  I also
added the CLIENTTCPPORT option and used 1511,1512,1513 and 1514
respectively.  I ran the dsmcutil command below for each Scheduler service I
wanted to create:

dsmcutil install /name:"ADSM Scheduler 4 X97958" /clientdir:"C:\Program
Files\IBM\ADSM\Baclient" /password:ADSMBKUP /autostart:Yes
/OPTFILE:"C:\Program
Files\IBM\ADSM\Baclient\dsm4.opt" /SCHEDLOG:"C:\Program Files\IBM\ADSM
dsmsched4.log" /ERRORLOG:"C:\Program Files\IBM\ADSM\dsmerror4.log"

        All 4 service were created successfully.  I went into the dsmsched.log 
file
for each and each had the correct next schedule.  Each was waiting to be
contacted by the server.  The next schedule was set for 15:00.  Well 15:00
came and went.  The only dsmsched.log file that showed it was contacted was
dsmsched4.log.  There were no errors in any of the dsmerror.logs.

        Now, I am debating switching to polling which I have been told works but
have not tested.  Still I would rather use prompted.  Also if you think the
answer is different node names, well, its not I tried that and it made no
difference.

Thanks,
        Kyle
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>