ADSM-L

Re: multiple instance recommendations

2006-05-27 18:51:09
Subject: Re: multiple instance recommendations
From: "Allen S. Rout" <asr AT UFL DOT EDU>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 18:50:51 -0400
>> On Fri, 26 May 2006 22:43:04 -0400, Robin Sharpe <Robin_Sharpe AT BERLEX DOT 
>> COM> said:

> One other recommendation, which I did... do not run all of your TSM
> instances as root (you are on Unix , right?).  Doing so, if you do a
> "ps -ef|grep dsmserv" command, you can't tell which process belongs
> to which server without doing more research .

My solution to the same concern was to always always start my servers
through a script, which  added '-- SERVERNAME' to the command line.

    root  397336       1   0   Dec 03      - 8801:30 dsmserv quiet -- COPIES
    root  696478       1  31   Jan 01      - 6458:42 dsmserv quiet -- CTRL
    root  741538       1  16   Jan 05      - 27056:49 dsmserv quiet -- EXT
    root  757808       1   0   Mar 29      - 2766:05 dsmserv quiet -- GLMAIL03
    root  761968       1  31   Jan 19      - 17946:45 dsmserv quiet -- INT
    root  790706       1   0   Apr 28  pts/7 1503:28 dsmserv quiet -- GLMAIL02
    root  835662       1   0   Dec 29      - 969:21 dsmserv quiet -- WEBCT
    root  868510       1   0   Apr 07      - 2136:54 dsmserv quiet -- GLMAIL01
    root  946258       1   0   Apr 28  pts/7 1246:19 dsmserv quiet -- GLMAIL04
    root  962606       1   6   Apr 27  pts/7 10684:18 dsmserv quiet -- ERP

The different-user solution was suggested to me, but I have the
opinion that there would be more pain in moving resources from server
'X' to server 'Y' than would be saved.

> This will also prevent the wrong TSM from accessing another TSM's
> storage... this can be easy to do if you use raw logical volumes as
> we do.

Heh.

And my solution to this is through nomenclature.  So, for instance,
for the 'ERP' server, the lvs have the 'erp' string in a well-defined
place.


-bash-2.05b$ lsvg -l tsmdat  | grep -i erp
terpdat000          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat001          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat002          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat003          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat004          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat005          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat006          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat007          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat008          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat009          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat010          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A
terpdat011          jfs        45    45    1    open/syncd    N/A


As robin notes, this doesn't -prevent- "erp" from stomping on
something which should belong to "int", but it makes it harder to do
such a thing accidentally.

In my organization, we're trying very hard to keep unified namespaces
of IDs; Adding an additional TSM instance userid might have
campus-wide namespace implications.  Consequently, I resist their
proliferation rather strongly.



- Allen S. Rout