HPE GreenLake Administration
- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- HPE ProLiant
- >
- Server Management - Systems Insight Manager
- >
- Re: SIM Data Collection is useless
Server Management - Systems Insight Manager
1833173
Members
3070
Online
110051
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
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
back
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
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- 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
11-02-2004 05:14 AM
11-02-2004 05:14 AM
SIM Data Collection is useless
Redundant records and information being stored in the wrong fields have rendered HPSIM pretty much useless in our environment, preventing us from upgrading our current CIM7 server. Here are some examples:
IN the R_OperatingSystem view (and in the CIM_OperatingSystem table it pulls from), many of my servers appear twice with different information in the SubDesc field. In one entry, this field contains the Service Pack, build, and uni/multiprocessor designation. In others, it contains the description we've assigned. The CIM7 R_OperatingSystem table consistenly listed only the Service Pack info. In the R_ArrayControllers view, each server has two separate records for each controller. One entry lists BoardName correctly, and Model is, the second lists BoardName , and Model correctly. Again, the CIM7 R_ArrayControllers view correctly lists one entry per array controller per server. The R_CPU view is the worst. I have several dual processor servers that have 6 separate records. The CIM7 R_CPU table correctly lists one record per processor per server.
I am fairly certain that this is all due to the fact that SIM is using multiple protocols for the data collection tasks, and that each protocol is seeing the same information slightly differently, resulting in unique records. This needs to be fixed, as the data obtained from the canned reports, as well as what we're trying to extract into other databases, is now totally unreliable.
Is anyone at HP looking into this?
IN the R_OperatingSystem view (and in the CIM_OperatingSystem table it pulls from), many of my servers appear twice with different information in the SubDesc field. In one entry, this field contains the Service Pack, build, and uni/multiprocessor designation. In others, it contains the description we've assigned. The CIM7 R_OperatingSystem table consistenly listed only the Service Pack info. In the R_ArrayControllers view, each server has two separate records for each controller. One entry lists BoardName correctly, and Model is
I am fairly certain that this is all due to the fact that SIM is using multiple protocols for the data collection tasks, and that each protocol is seeing the same information slightly differently, resulting in unique records. This needs to be fixed, as the data obtained from the canned reports, as well as what we're trying to extract into other databases, is now totally unreliable.
Is anyone at HP looking into this?
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-02-2004 07:11 AM
11-02-2004 07:11 AM
Re: SIM Data Collection is useless
Tend to agree it's gone backwards. There were some other threads on the R-Tables a few weeks ago.
I've sorted out many of the duplicates by reducing the protocols and deleting and rediscovering servers.
I found that new Servers that were initially built as Workgroup, discovered by HPSIm and then added to the domain also had duplicate entries.
I've got the tables clean but lost some historical data.
CIM 7 seemed to regenerate the R_ tables, HPSIM does not seem to follow the same process.
I've sorted out many of the duplicates by reducing the protocols and deleting and rediscovering servers.
I found that new Servers that were initially built as Workgroup, discovered by HPSIm and then added to the domain also had duplicate entries.
I've got the tables clean but lost some historical data.
CIM 7 seemed to regenerate the R_ tables, HPSIM does not seem to follow the same process.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
11-02-2004 07:29 AM
11-02-2004 07:29 AM
Re: SIM Data Collection is useless
I've removed everything from SIM (its still in "lab mode") and enabled just snmp. that clears up most of the duplication on the devices that I add back in, but the Array Controller info is still duplicated. There may be others, but I've not dug into everything yet. WBEM is the biggest culprit for the duplicate & junk data that I get.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
Company
Events and news
Customer resources
© Copyright 2025 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP