James is absolutely correct.  TEC too is a resource monster :-)

However, if properly implemented you can tame em.  To the point....

First and foremost, I would never recommend putting the two systems on
the same box.  There are many things to consider when architecting TEC,
Netview and the db that host there data.  For example, conventional
wisdom
saids, put the db on the same box to eliminate latency through the
network.

If you want a speedy Netview, use the default db/flat file.  If you want
to
use tools to extract netview data, use a thrird party db, i.e., oracle,
sybase, etc.
An example of a tool to extract the snmp data would be TDS and the
netview guides.

OK so I went on a little tangent.  I would say consider this as you make
your decision,
"single point of failure".  This box goes down, you are blind.....

Richard C. Barr

PS:  With scoping the size of the box, at a minimum, determine the
sizing requirements
     for all components and "DOUBLE THEM".

-----Original Message-----
From: James Shanks [mailto:James_Shanks AT TIVOLI DOT COM]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 9:21 AM
To: NV-L AT UCSBVM.ucsb DOT edu
Subject: Re: Netview and TEC


It had better be one fast, multi-processor box, with a huge amount of
memory.
Both NetView and TEC individually have been know to take up all the
resources a
box can give and literally drive it to its knees.  There are NetView
sizing
guidelines in the appendix to the Installation and Configuration manual
that you
should follow, but remember these are only recommended minimums.  I
don't know
about TEC.    I have seen this down in the lab, and the results are that
TEC is
rather slow, but I have never seen it in a customer environment.

There are other concerns which militate against this idea, too,  in that
it
makes it difficult to isolate performance problems or to take the box
down for
maintenance.

James Shanks
Tivoli (NetView for UNIX) L3 Support



Andre Faille <Andre.Faille AT SITA DOT INT> on 11/19/99 09:45:44 AM

Please respond to Discussion of IBM NetView and POLYCENTER Manager on
NetView
      <NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU>

To:   NV-L AT UCSBVM.UCSB DOT EDU
cc:    (bcc: James Shanks/Tivoli Systems)
Subject:  Netview and TEC




Hi all,

Our Tivoli planned design calls for one TMR on a SUN machine with
inventory,
remote distribution, etc.... and a second SUN machine with NetView and
TEC
installed.

I know that TEC is usually planned on a separate machine altogether, but
for
arguments sake, do you know of any reason or counter-directive with
installing
NetView and TEC on the same machine (but different partitions)?

TEC would use a third machine running Sybase for it's databases.

Thanks for your input....

Andre Faille
LAN Management Analyst, SITA-EQUANT
andre.faille AT sita DOT int