SAM wants EVERYONEb,"s input!

[Kelli Ward]

Hi SAM_TEAM,
I would be ok with a web-based SAM implementation.
There are occasions when a terminal interface is nice to have. I would be sorry to see it go, especially when using a Windows terminal not running an emulator.
I would like more network monitoring. I might also be inclined to keep SAM open more if I could launch STM and EMS from it.
The ability to integrate more logs and filter sort them could be fun.
Thanks,
Kel

[Ron Cornwell]

I use command line for most functions. What would be nice is GUI monitoring capability of ServiceGaurd Cluster and possibly a configuration section for ISEE. Making it so that you don't have to launch other mgmt/ admin apps seperately but using an icon directly for SAM.

[Kim Kendall]

1. Not to crazy about a web server being loaded on all of my servers. I wouldn't do it if I had the choice.

2. I use command line for almost everything. When I need Sam I will ALWAYS use the terminal version because I telnet/ssh to the servers. I only use Sam for things like kernel param tweaks, etc. I want the TUI to be kept around. It uses less system resources than the GUI.

3. I have a view into a couple of my critical servers and constantly monitor cpu, disk, and mem

4. Like the very first response to this thread, I have always found Sam to be a PIA because you can't see the command behind the curtain (like you can w/smitty on AIX using the F6 key). cd'ing to a directory and opening the sam log it rediculous! So... the one thing that I think Sam lacks is THIS!!!

[Mark Henry_1]

I would think apache, purely for extra ease of administration would add more load on a system that is already running enough, plus now exposing that system to potential apache vulnerabilities which would create a headache when it comes time to patch them all.

Perhaps an embedded GSP web server would be nice?

Regarding LVM, load balancing across alternate paths would be way cool.

Thx,
Mark

[Tom Maloy]

1. No Apache, for reasons of load, security, performance, ...

2. TUI or CLI is absolutely essential. If they are not available, I may have to drive to the system in another state to fix a problem.

3. I'd like to see Glance info and kernel params.

4. Speed is an issue. The "smit" shortcuts would be a good idea.

[Cheryl Griffin]

2. Must have a TUI. TUI takes out all complications of a displayback, remote support, etc. Even if web-based is available, TUI is needed/wanted.

3. The same kind of functions that were added in kcweb would be highly valuable.

[John Collier]

OK ladies and gentlemen. I can???t exclaim to be the world???s biggest expert on this, but here goes nothing.

1. There is no way that I would want a web server loaded on every system and I would be absolutely amazed if this company would even allow it. Like you, I understand that the general push these days is to do everything through a web type interface, but on a personal level I think this is the wrong direction to push for everyday system administration. Just because it is possible to do it with IP doesn???t make it the right move to make. Stay away from it.

2. I saw a reply in the above list that I will have to echo here. I have nothing against the idea of giving the administrators more choices, but don???t take away something that is battle tested and proven to work. That just isn???t a wise thing. Besides, it looks like you want to put even this on the web-based bandwagon. Once again, I don???t support the idea of shoving everything to a web-based interface. It???s just wrong.


3. I think the answer to number three would sound more like a question on my part than an answer. My thought on this is ???What types of monitoring would NOT be valuable to me???? Anything that has to do with my system and its overall health is of interest to me. The more choices you can give me for monitoring the better I will feel. If you do surprise me and give me something I don???t want to see, I will learn to ignore it or simply not pull it up.

4. I don???t know where to go with # 4 that hasn???t already been said. It appears that everybody else has spoken on this. If you will take the time to read them, you will find some very good feedback in the above answers.


I don???t know what my measly little $0.02 will do here in the long run, but since you said you wanted everyone???s input I thought I would chime in.

[Victor BERRIDGE]

I forgot to add

3: Yes some network monitoring would be great
4: Since there is almost evrey thing in SAM -Why not have also an configuration assitant for sendmail? and perhaps also samba (but I know that would mean also less postings on how to...)

Have a good week-end

Victor

[Gary Yu]

Dear SAM team,

I'm not sure if your team are also responsible for Glance, I would suggest make Glance a default installed bundle instead of a separate software, just like SAM.

The reason is, right now Glance is kind of a must-have tool on HPUX, but some managers/boss don't see the value of it, they refuse to pay more money on it, which makes the life of admins hard. If it comes with HPUX (evenif it's a bit more expensive than before), the boss won't notice that when they purchased at the first place.

I believe there're lots of admins out there have the same situation.

thanks,
Gary

[BFA6]

Hi,

1. Not sure whether it would be acceptable to run Apache on all servers.

2. Please don't get rid of the TUI. I only ever use that. I personally don't like the GUI, I find it far too slow.

3. Definitely kernel parameters.

4. I never use sam for LVM work, it's far too slow. In fact I only use it for kernel configuration.

Regards,

Hilary