different maps derrived from one

1998-07-19 11:44:35
Subject: different maps derrived from one
From: Leslie Clark <lclark AT US.IBM DOT COM>
To: nv-l AT lists.tivoli DOT com
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 11:44:35 -0400
Peter, check the man page for ovtopofix for a discussion of -A  and -a
regarding repopulating multiple
maps. The problem you have, re-discovering just certain networks on certain
maps, is that to
rediscover a deleted object, you must first delete it from ALL maps. Maybe you
can get away with
just deleting the missing things from all maps (they are probably still on the
default map) and
rediscovering them (eg by doing a demandpoll on the routers that are on those

Now some unsolicted advice:

 If there are unwanted devices in your map, you should probably just prevent
their discovery in the
first place using the restrictive capabilities of the seedfile. There is  a
pretty thorough discussion of
seedfile processing in the Admin Guide.

Keeping different maps with different devices in them leads to administrative
complications because
of this need to delete things from all maps before rediscovery. My preferred
approach is to make one
map with the superset of  all devices that are to be managed (and ONLY those
devices). nicely
cut and pasted, and take a  backup of that single-map database ( a tar of
Then if I need some extra maps for other users, I use the 'save as' function
and try to keep changes
to those maps to a minimum. Things like unmanaging and hiding whole sections or
location icons
qualify as minor changes. Save this multi-map database as well. Now, if there
are networks changes
that require me to delete and rediscover something, I only have to 1) restore
the single-map database
and let it sync up to the current network configuration, 2) make any changes,
deletes, rediscovers (it works
quickly because it is one map),  3) save this new single-map database, 4)
repeat the 'save as' and
customize steps (this is  why I keep the modifications to a minimum). Then, of
course, take a new backup
of the multi-map database.

It is my opinion that using multiple maps JUST as a means of limiting the
devices on the map, and never
using the default map because it has too much stuff on it, is bad form.
Neatness counts!


Leslie Clark
IBM Global Services - Network & Systems Management - Detroit
>Another question to all the NetView users:
>Just derrived from default map are some maps - all the unneccessary
>devices deleted from these maps, but there are some networks which link
>the devices together, missing - any idea to get them into this map?
>thanks a lot in advance!
>    best regards
>        Peter

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>