M-L] Bug? Using multiple client service instances on
Windows server
Paul, I was just curious if you tried to run the "dsmcutil updatepw"
command inbetween the creation of the two services for the BOOGA node. In
looking at all my scripts I make sure to do this. Of course it is so
Paul, I was just curious if you tried to run the "dsmcutil updatepw" command
inbetween the creation of the two services for the BOOGA node. In looking at
all my scripts I make sure to do this. Of course it is so that I don't have to
use dsmc to set the password locally but it might also be som
I agree - it's not a show stopper, as long as you know what you're looking for
it can be worked around.
I've gotten tied up today with a raid array failure so I haven't had a chance
yet to try my findings on a win2003 box - I'd still like to demonstrate that,
since my original findings (and the ca
Paul, thanks for all the detail. I was able to reproduce your findings; I
don't think the TSM server version makes a difference.
The only thing that seems odd to me is the connection as MATHILDA when
BOOGA is being configured. Off the top of my head, the obvious answer is
that the current instance
erent ballgame to the original behavior I was previously
discussing.
Tommorow I'll try this with a 2003 server to see if I can demonstrate the
original behavior I was talking about, but clearly something is amis
regardless
regards,
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Andrew R
previously
discussing.
Tommorow I'll try this with a 2003 server to see if I can demonstrate the
original behavior I was talking about, but clearly something is amis
regardless....
regards,
Paul
- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Raibeck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tue
e client connections as the scheduler
> connects. the first connection uses the wrong (first) nodename, the
second
> connection uses the correct (second) nodename.
>
> other than that, everything seems to work correctly.
>
> Paul
>
> - Original Message -
> Fr
tion uses the wrong (first) nodename, the second
> connection uses the correct (second) nodename.
>
> other than that, everything seems to work correctly.
>
> Paul
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "TSM_User"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9
first connection uses the wrong (first) nodename, the
second
> connection uses the correct (second) nodename.
>
> other than that, everything seems to work correctly.
>
> Paul
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "TSM_User"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, Febr
see two more client connections as the scheduler
> connects. the first connection uses the wrong (first) nodename, the
second
> connection uses the correct (second) nodename.
>
> other than that, everything seems to work correctly.
>
> Paul
>
> - Original Message ---
d
> connection uses the correct (second) nodename.
>
> other than that, everything seems to work correctly.
>
> Paul
>
> - Original Message -----
> From: "TSM_User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:58 PM
> Subject
st) nodename, the second
> connection uses the correct (second) nodename.
>
> other than that, everything seems to work correctly.
>
> Paul
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "TSM_User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2
an that, everything seems to work correctly.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "TSM_User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Bug? Using multiple client service instances on
Windows server
> We have over 20 Windows
ent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Bug? Using multiple client service instances on
Windows server
We have over 20 Windows 2000 Cluster servers. On all of these servers we
have to create 2 sets of all the services. One for the local drive and one
for the cluster. We have nev
We have over 20 Windows 2000 Cluster servers. On all of these servers we have
to create 2 sets of all the services. One for the local drive and one for the
cluster. We have never run into the issue you are speaking of. We use the
dsmcutil command to create all our servers via scripting. The o
Several years ago I noticed an interesting behavior when installing multiple
client scheduler services on a server. A ticket was opened with IBM and the
final word came back that there was indeed a bug, the apar was opened, and we
were told it would be resolved. This week I've encoutered the
16 matches
Mail list logo
