- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- Task to task
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-22-2004 11:46 PM
02-22-2004 11:46 PM
Task to task
When the node or network is slow, the clients receive "network partner exited" and on the server side "file not accessed on channel".
I think the problem is related to the fact that a number of clients share the same server process. The clients are doing f$search("x::*.com") directed to the server and thus have a context on the server process.
Is there a way to get 1 process per client and not to re-use processes ? Or another workaround ?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-22-2004 11:48 PM
02-22-2004 11:48 PM
Re: Task to task
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 12:02 AM
02-23-2004 12:02 AM
Re: Task to task
Perhaps you can rewrite your procedures to run the F$SEARCH locally on the server and transfer the results via $WRITE/READ. Then you can put a better error handling around it.
You might be able to tweak some DECnet counters, but that is a system-wide setup. Sorry, can't tell you which knobs to turn - somebody else?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 12:24 AM
02-23-2004 12:24 AM
Re: Task to task
Indeed I can rewrite the code. But I prefer not too.
I did some testing and found that the processes were not reused while the f$search was in progress. It must something else. Some timeout ? Some locking ptroblems ?
Btw : I'am using DecnetPlus.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 12:38 AM
02-23-2004 12:38 AM
Re: Task to task
There is some processing involved when the I/O channel is closed - see SYS$SYSTEM:NETSERVER.COM. During that time the server process obviously cannot take over a connection request :-(
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 12:43 AM
02-23-2004 12:43 AM
Re: Task to task
Further investigation (via accountng) indicate that the same problems arrised for another (1 !) process doing /out=xx:file.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 01:22 AM
02-23-2004 01:22 AM
Re: Task to task
$ open /write LL 0::tmp.tmp
$ close LL
$ open /write LL 0::tmp.tmp
$ close LL
On the other hand: what happens on the server when you create one file this way. Do you get a process named "FAL_xxxx" which changes after some time to "SERVER_xxxx"? or do these processes quit their work right after you close the I/O channel?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 01:41 AM
02-23-2004 01:41 AM
Re: Task to task
I don't know if you are using DecNet IV or V so I answer by my knoledge about DecNet phase IV.
Stay warning when you change some parameter; if my mind support me you could change executor values; there are follows parameters:
NCP>SET EXEC INCOMING TIMER nn
NCP>SET EXEC INACTIVITY TIMER nn
NCP>SET EXEC MAX LINK nn
Before change any one you must see current value typing
NCP>SHOW EXEC CHAR
You could increase MAX LINK (the # of processes linked to external client), increase INCOMING TIMER (time-out to reject incoming connection) and decrease INACTIVITY TIMER (inactivity time process still live).
You can read SET command to check result but you need issue DEF command to store permanently.
H.T.H.
@Antoniov
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 01:47 AM
02-23-2004 01:47 AM
Re: Task to task
I'm starting when there is only 1 answer and I finished after you post use DecNet Plus.
I think yuo can find in DecNet plus documentation about translation of command I've posted
Regards
@Antoniov
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 01:48 AM
02-23-2004 01:48 AM
Re: Task to task
I simulated the problem by starting a process on prio=8 while running 10 jobs doing remote access in a loop to the node itself.
All jobs terminated with "network partner exited" and all net$server.log said "file not accessed on channel".
It could indeed be the timeout values you mention. But they are already at 45 and 60 seconds (mc ncl show ses con all).
Uwe : the task is created and stays until the f$search is done.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 01:50 AM
02-23-2004 01:50 AM
Re: Task to task
and here is what I found:
If your system is too busy to get FAL started soon enough to
successfully complete the logical link, or if there is too much "stuff"
going on in SYSLOGIN.COM or LOGIN.COM that FAL doesn't start before the
delay timers run out, you may experience this error message.
The time-stamps in the NETSERVER.LOG files may indicate the delays between
the first stamp and the startup time for FAL. A LOGIN.COM which includes
a WAIT for 1 minute can result in an SYS-F-FILNOTACC error, in the
NETSERVER.LOG file.
HTH,
Best regards,
Lokesh
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 01:58 AM
02-23-2004 01:58 AM
Re: Task to task
Nope. The creation of the process goes fine. After serving a few operations it gives the channel error.
The timeout-abort is about 2 till 5 minutes after the last fal request msg in net$server.log.
After all batch job aborted, there were about 10 server process active.
Still something wrong.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2004 02:47 AM
02-23-2004 02:47 AM
Re: Task to task
I don't know DecNet plus, so you could verify all my informations but I think task to task is like DecNet IV; server process starts, answer to client request and stay live for a short time (1-5 min), waiting for a new client request.
In you environment, where you have 150 client, perhaps, you could set 100-150 links and check for SYSTEM quotas in AUTHORIZE to support all processes.
@Antoniov
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 02:44 AM
02-24-2004 02:44 AM
Re: Task to task
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 02:48 AM
02-24-2004 02:48 AM
Re: Task to task
Question : How many nodes can be put in a cluster ?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 03:23 AM
02-24-2004 03:23 AM
Re: Task to task
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 03:50 AM
02-24-2004 03:50 AM
Re: Task to task
However, there are several installations with many more nodes. Check the Ask the Wizard site and past postings in comp.os.vms for some potential pointers.
Since the node table has 255 entries, that's the hard upper limit.
For a supported system, you could cluster 95 satellites and then use DECnet for the remainder...
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 04:47 AM
02-24-2004 04:47 AM
Re: Task to task
Interesting playing: if I recall correctly, the LVB is max. 128 byte in size.
- 128 byte * 8 bit/byte = 1024 bits
- 1024 bites / 96 nodes = 10 bit/node
- the node part of a DECnet address (area.1-1023) is 10 bits
I remember those discussions from the DECUS days when customers were complaining that they had to buy a DECnet router license for one of their cluster members. (political requirement to fulfill what is offered in the software product description - I was told).
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 06:16 AM
02-24-2004 06:16 AM
Re: Task to task
The difference is between supported and not-supported installations.
Keith Parris has some good stuff on this topic as well.
Building Large Local Area VAXcluster (LAVC) Configurations
http://www.geocities.com/keithparris/decus_presentations/biglavc_article.ps
His overall web page has lots more useful stuff, too:
http://www.geocities.com/keithparris/
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 07:13 AM
02-24-2004 07:13 AM
Re: Task to task
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 07:41 AM
02-24-2004 07:41 AM
Re: Task to task
I'm not sure there's a one-to-one mapping between DECnet addresses and lock information. I'd have to dig out my internals books, and that sounds like work. ;-)
The big picture is that the original poster COULD solve this problem with clustering, not that he SHOULD do it this way.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 05:27 PM
02-24-2004 05:27 PM
Re: Task to task
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 08:33 PM
02-24-2004 08:33 PM
Re: Task to task
Another idea: Have a look at the NETSERVER$TIMEOUT logical at the server side. If it's not defined, the timeout value is about 5 minutes. You can assign aVMS delta time to it and keep the netserver up for more than 5 minutes. This prevents a slow system from permanent process creation and deletion.
Egs.
$ DEFINE/SYS/EXEC NETSERVER$TIMEOUT -
"0 00:01:00.00"
would keep the FAL process up for 1 hour.
Regards
Juerg
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 08:35 PM
02-24-2004 08:35 PM
Re: Task to task
correction:
$ DEFINE/SYS/EXEC NETSERVER$TIMEOUT -
"0 01:00:00.00"
would keep the FAL process up for 1 hour.
Regards
Juerg
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-24-2004 09:08 PM
02-24-2004 09:08 PM
Re: Task to task
The timeout is at 00:05 and there are not that many processes arriving at the timeout.
The 150 nodes do their access in a random way in a 60 minutes interval.
But to be complete :
1) at 5:30 a power cut is done. After that ALL 10 cluster stations start booting. Because of the power cut cluster stations are stopped without proper dismount. The server starts a shadow merge (1 on each node) for 2 9GB disks. Between 5:30 and 6:00 also a defragmentation was active and also some Sybase database dumping.
2) the 10 cluster stations start booting. Because the system disk is in shadow merge, they all have to do their reading twice. I checked and found that they transfer each 350 MByte over their 10 MBit network interface (normally 200). The last boot was finished at 8:00 !!!
3) at 6:00 the first remote accesses arrive. Each nodes requires about 20 remote accesses. The system is slow and I think we get timeouts.
BUT MY QUESTIONS ARE :
1) why don't we get timeout messages instead of the channel message ?
2) how is it possible that these processes don't get any cpu (shadow server is running with prio 1)
3) why don't I get the message after less than 1 minute (the decnet timeout) ?
4) why are the IO done on behalve of the cluster stations not visible (e.g. a vms process) ? Only VPA reports "virtual IO".