I can't tell you which one is better, but with the X-Clients we have
less problems. But it's true that also the X-Client shows sometimes
different object status on different screens, using the same map. Only a
"refresh map" solves this problem. Some folks from IBM told me that,
when the AIX-Clients were available, some code was removed which updated
the maps of X-Clients (speeking of the object status, to get topology
changes I can accept to refresh the map). I still can't believe that
they really took away this part of the code, but at the moment we have
no other solution than refreshing the map from time to time.
To avoid this problem we use a collection group showing only those
devices where an interface or the node itself is down, but then you need
to have read/write - access to the map to get the changes visualized on
the screen, so we have to make a secondary map of each of our maps for
the network control center, which means a lot of work.
So I am sorry, but I have no solution to this (we are hoping and waiting
for NV5.1 to be better ...)
Adibah Mohamed wrote:
> I've always been using x-host for clients but seem to have the same
> problem of my clients showing different ovject status... (had to refresh
> the map). I'm tempted to install NV Client instead, hoping to eliminate
> this problem.
> Micheal, if you're saying that you have the same problem as I am with
> my x-host, which is the better?
> Michael Seibold PTS/M-SW wrote:
> > Hi Frank,
> > we installed NV Clients (didn't do it myself, so i can't tell you how),
> > but we had a lot of problems with clients showing different object
> > status (after restarting the clients they showed the correct status, but
> > that's no way to work) so we stopped using NV Clients and went back
> > using X-Clients.
> > Won't help you, but just a hint.
> > Michael Seibold
> > GribbonFG AT STENTOR DOT CA wrote:
> > >
> > > Has anyone installed the Netview Client and what procedure did you follow?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Frank