RE: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables

[Hona, David S]

Gerry,

Enter the values stated, separated by spaces, I believe.

We're not having problems with our UCI connections, so have never needed to
debug them. It's a new feature, so perhaps it doesn't actually work as
documented!

Regards
David


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of gerry simpson
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:52 PM
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: Re: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables


Thanks  David

the docs 'explain' how to enable server side uci logging via the
UVHOME/serverdebug file this file doesn not currently exist and no format
beyond 'column' values is given. do you know what the format of this file is
? what delimits a column , space , comma , tab  , colon ? i've tried all 4
but have yet to see a debug log file appear. do we have to restart uci/uv to
have changes take effect ?

gerry



> - Original Message -
> From: "Hona, David S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'U2 Users Discussion List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:26 AM
> Subject: RE: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables
>
>
> >
> > I suggest you read-up on how to enable the UCI logging feature. As
> UniOLEDB
> > uses UCI to communicate with UV.
> >
> > See 'Administrative Supplement for Client APIs' pages 3-21 and 3-22.
> >
> > Of course, this will just help with issues at the UV end.
> >
> > Regards
> > David
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> > Behalf Of gerry simpson
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 5:38 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables
> >
> >
> > we have set up universe 10  in SQL Server 2K as a linked database 
> > via UniOLEDB.
> >
> > we have a test file set up that consists of 2 single valued fields & 
> > 2
> multi
> > valued fields
> >
> > at the universe command prompt we can access both the table and the
> virtual
> > table for the multi values : SELECT * FROM TEST.TAB ; [snip]
> >
> > any ideas ?
> >
> > does universe keep any type of log for oleDB access - i can't find 
> > one
to
> > see if the request is even getting to universe.
> >
> > gerry
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?

[Steven M Wagner]

Stephen M. O'Neal, CDP said that "...currently, most W2000 installations 
max out at about 300 users."  I wonder how often sites that plan for higher 
user counts go with a *nix solution to start with?

For what it is worth, I had 200 UV9.6.2.8 users on a WinNT 4.0 box.  And 
this was with a Compaq Proliant 5500 with 512MB of RAM and two 200Mhz CPUs, 
Xeons I believe.  And no complaints about speed.



--
Steven M Wagner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cary, North Carolina, United States of America
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: [UV] Would anyone be interested in UV based bible software?

[Dawn M. Wolthuis]

Nick Hengeveld wrote a program called the Bible Gateway while he was working
for me at Calvin College -- I'm guessing more than a decade ago.  I believe
it is still maintained at www.gospelcom.net  (it is not mv-based).  I didn't
check before passing along this URL but take a look and I suspect it is
still there.  Rev Fun is there too -- Nick's brother, Max, who was a student
employee, writes those.

Dawn M. Wolthuis
Tincat Group, Inc.
www.tincat-group.com

Take and give some delight today.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:41 PM
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: Re: [UV] Would anyone be interested in UV based bible software?

Aren't there bible applications already written. I don't know of them but
i've heard of them as they can quickly cross reference passages and named
references.


- Original Message -
From: "Glenn W. Paschal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 11:03 PM
Subject: [UV] Would anyone be interested in UV based bible software?


> I am working on a bible application for my personal use.  If anyone else
> would be interested in this type application, let me know.  I would
welcome
> the inputs and ideas on what it should be capable of.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Glenn W. Paschal
> PasTech LLC
> Computer Consulting
> ph. (931) 526-9631
> fx. (931) 526-9678
> email.   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web.   www.pastech.net
> --
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [UV] Would anyone be interested in UV based bible software?

[Mark Johnson]

Aren't there bible applications already written. I don't know of them but
i've heard of them as they can quickly cross reference passages and named
references.


- Original Message -
From: "Glenn W. Paschal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 11:03 PM
Subject: [UV] Would anyone be interested in UV based bible software?


> I am working on a bible application for my personal use.  If anyone else
> would be interested in this type application, let me know.  I would
welcome
> the inputs and ideas on what it should be capable of.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Glenn W. Paschal
> PasTech LLC
> Computer Consulting
> ph. (931) 526-9631
> fx. (931) 526-9678
> email.   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> web.   www.pastech.net
> --
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[UV] Would anyone be interested in UV based bible software?

[Glenn W. Paschal]

I am working on a bible application for my personal use.  If anyone else
would be interested in this type application, let me know.  I would welcome
the inputs and ideas on what it should be capable of.
 
Thanks,
 
Glenn W. Paschal
PasTech LLC
Computer Consulting
ph. (931) 526-9631
fx. (931) 526-9678
email.   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web.   www.pastech.net
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: Two ways to acquire the U2 Tech Support Survival Kit CD

[mkmullane]

(NOTE - That this info is for Australian residents ONLY.)
According to IBM, you call IBM Software Tech Support on 131426 & "follow the 
prompts".   (I am assuming that you need to be an owner of a valid U2 licence of 
some sort, as I haven't called them yet.)


MARY MULLANE
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: (Fwd: ENC: Notify about your e-mail account utilization.)

[Moderator]

Just to clarify, I didn't get stung per se. The datastage list got hit 
by a user who got stung.

Even when I user Windows, I don't use outlook. I use Thunderbird and 
Firebird (now Firefox) from the Mozilla Project. Much faster, more 
stable, and less of these kinds of issues than MS Outhouse and Internet 
Exploder. ;-)

([ADMIN] tag removed)

--

Regards,

Clif "The package said Windows 98 or better. So I installed Linux" Oliver

Results wrote:
Moderator,
   Outlook is the platform of choice for viruses. :/ Sorry to hear that 
you got stung.

   - Charles "Used Outlook once but didn't inhale" Barouch
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Moderator wrote:

ALERT!

It appears that someone on the list got infected with a virus. One of 
these beasties goes through the infected Microsoft address book and 
starts faking these "admin" messages to the other addresses in the book.

THESE MESSAGES ARE NOT COMING FROM ANYONE AT OLIVER.COM



___
datastage-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/datastage-users
 


--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: [UV] Change prompt?

[Adrian . Womack]

Ray Wurlod wrote:
Or you could hassle IBM to add PI/open's COMMAND.EDITOR to UniVerse.

Clifton Oliver wrote:
It is already there at release 10.

Yes, but full of bugs and basically unusable.

AdrianW
Disclaimer.  This e-mail is private and confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, please advise us by return e-mail immediately, and
delete the e-mail and any attachments without using or disclosing the
contents in any way. The views expressed in this e-mail are those of the
author, and do not represent those of this company unless this is clearly
indicated. You should scan this e-mail and any attachments for viruses. This
company accepts no liability for any direct or indirect damage or loss
resulting from the use of any attachments to this e-mail.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[John Jenkins]

Microsoft "workstation" products have a maximum of 10 external (incoming)
TCP/IP  connections

Workstation products are 
Win Nt 4 Workstation
Win 2K Workstation
Win XP

So - as long as you will never - ever - have more than 10 external IP's
connection you can load an XP system - remember though that it is *NOT* a
server platform and there are differences.

Just waiting to se what happens when WinXPsp2 comes out - hurrumph.

Also remember that XP is not a supported server platform - I would go with
*nix 

Regards

JayJay


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Joe Walter
Sent: 09 March 2004 19:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?


Got a small company that would like to get going with a Universe based app,
but doesn't want to invest in a full blown Win3K server with local domain
user/security, blah, blah.

Wondering if we could get away with using a Win XP Pro box as the 'server'.

I understand the WinXP Pro box would have to have NTFS file system - but I
think that's possible or is available as an option on XP Pro?

Any comments, ideas, feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Joe Walter
Fax/Voice mail: 1.435.514.5132
http://jaw1.home.mindspring.com

Did you ever stop to think, and forget to start again?

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users


-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[Ron White]

- Original Message - 
From: "Joe Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 1:15 PM
Subject: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?



> Wondering if we could get away with using a Win XP Pro box as the
'server'.
>
> I understand the WinXP Pro box would have to have NTFS file system - but I
> think that's possible or is available as an option on XP Pro?


I have been running a three user license Uv 10.0 on XP Pro since it was
released
and before that Uv 9.5.1.  It is only used as a development and testing
platform
but for a small operation it should work well.  You would be limited to a
max of
ten users due to the OS user limit.

Ron White


---
[ Eckel certifies this E-mail to be virus free. ]

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UniVerse on NT vs *nix

[Results]

Sara,
   As a professional trainer, I can assure you that the cost of 
training staff in a second O/S is smaller than the cost of lost 
productivity corporate-wide. Tell them that they are moving from known 
stability to an unknown. Even if it works, they are facing weeks or 
months of settling in time. The overtime and delays in setting up the 
new system are likely to be larger than the delays caused by training.
   Please also point out that staff sees training as 'the employer 
investing in them' and downtime as 'the employer is mad at me' - they'll 
know which is better for morale in IT and corporate-wide.

   - Charles Barouch
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sara Burns wrote:

The general thinking is that it must be more effective to only have one
operating system.  Less staff training etc etc etc.
As there is so much that is NT based they think that all should be on 
NT.
That includes UniVerse and Oracle.  Of course SQLServer doesn't have the
choice.
The fact that UniVerse and Oracle are supported on NT makes it that much
harder to explain that this is not such a good idea.  I need facts to 
back
up my feelings.  Some years ago I was told by one of the knowledgeable
contributors to this list that "We would be brave to go the NT route, 
as we
would be the biggest site to do this."  I am trying to find out if 
that has
changed with the evolution of new versions of NT - now W2K3.

Just my .02

-John

--
Sincerely,
 Charles Barouch
 www.KeyAlly.com
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[Ross Ferris]

I know the "free" 2 user eval runs under XP-PRO, so I don't believe you would have any 
problems

Ross Ferris
Stamina Software
Visage – an Evolution in Software Development


>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Joe Walter
>Sent: Wednesday, 10 March 2004 6:15 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?
>
>
>Got a small company that would like to get going with a Universe based app,
>but doesn't want to invest in a full blown Win3K server with local domain
>user/security, blah, blah.
>
>Wondering if we could get away with using a Win XP Pro box as the 'server'.
>
>I understand the WinXP Pro box would have to have NTFS file system - but I
>think that's possible or is available as an option on XP Pro?
>
>Any comments, ideas, feedback would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Joe Walter
>Fax/Voice mail: 1.435.514.5132
>http://jaw1.home.mindspring.com
>
>Did you ever stop to think, and forget to start again?
>
>--
>u2-users mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
>
>
>---
>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 5/03/2004
>

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 5/03/2004
 
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UniVerse on NT vs *nix

[John Hester]

Sara Burns wrote:

The general thinking is that it must be more effective to only have one
operating system.  Less staff training etc etc etc.
As there is so much that is NT based they think that all should be on NT.
That includes UniVerse and Oracle.  Of course SQLServer doesn't have the
choice.
The fact that UniVerse and Oracle are supported on NT makes it that much
harder to explain that this is not such a good idea.  I need facts to back
up my feelings.  Some years ago I was told by one of the knowledgeable
contributors to this list that "We would be brave to go the NT route, as we
would be the biggest site to do this."  I am trying to find out if that has
changed with the evolution of new versions of NT - now W2K3.
The main argument I would make against such a move is the frequent need 
to load security patches and the need to reboot every time you do.  With 
worms floating around that infect Windows machines without any user 
intervention there's no choice but to load critical patches immediately, 
whether it's convenient or not.  We're not that large a shop and I would 
have a hard time scheduling downtime on a monthly basis.  There's almost 
always some important time-sensitive process running in UV.  I would 
imagine this problem is magnified at a larger company.  Our UV unix 
server has run for periods of close to a year without a reboot.

Just my .02

-John

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

UNCLASSIFIED RE: UV on Itanium

[HENDERSON MICHAEL MR]

Bill,

In my entirely unqualified opinion, I think IBM would be absolutely mad to
spend any time or money on an Itanium port. The Itanic looks sure to be
consigned to the trash-heap of history fairly quickly now that Intel have
admitted defeat and adopted the AMD64 instruction set.
I'd sit tight and wait until there's an Opteron & Xeon "IA32e" 64-bit port.
You'll be able to buy Opteron boxes from HP, Sun, IBM and maybe even Dell by
the middle of next quarter.

BTW, I wonder what's happened to the UV porting effort?
There have been very few (none at all for Windows, in fact) new postings to
the Product Availability Matrix since before Christmas. 
?

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brutzman, Bill
Sent: Wednesday, 10 March 2004 7:44 a.m.
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List'
Subject: UV on Itanium


We need to buy a new server.  Perhaps we should chill for a few months...

I gather that HP-Ux runs on Itanium now.  What is IBM's timetable for
rolling out Itanium servers with AIX?  When is UV targeted to run on
Itanium? 

The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended
for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not
necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or 
distribute this message or the information in it.

If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone
the sender immediately.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

UniVerse PE ODBC on Same PC

[Kryka, Richard]

Last week I downloaded UniVerse PE and installed it on a Windows 2000
PC.  This computer is to be stand-alone, with no network connection.
 
Everything seems fine except when using ODBC on that same machine.  The
Test in the UniVerse ODBC Configuration Editor takes forever (1minute 20
seconds).  It does eventually succeed.  
 
When I run a simple Crystal Report on that workstation against a small
file on the UniVerse DataBase on that same workstation, it sends the
processor usage through the roof and takes several minutes.  If I
connect another PC to this one and run the same report, it runs in a few
seconds.
 
It appears that UniVerse ODBC is intended for another PC (client)
accessing the server, and does not easily handle the client and server
being the same PC. 
 
Has anyone experienced this?  Do I need to set up ODBC a special way?
Or is this just the way UniVerse ODBC works when running on the same PC?
 
Thanks.
 
Dick Kryka
 
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV on Itanium

[Wally Terhune]

Glenn:
I'm curious. Do you have a 64-bit port of DataStage on Itanium (or any
other 64-bit platform) at this time?
Thanks

Wally Terhune
Manager - U2 Advanced Technical Services
IBM Data Management Solutions
Tel: 303.294.4866 Fax: 303.294.4832
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.ibm.com/software/data/u2/support - Open, Query, Update, Search -
Online!
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV on Itanium

[Glenn Herbert]

Thanks much for the info.

At 04:09 PM 03/09/2004, you wrote:
Glenn Herbert wrote:

So does this mean it's still a 32-bit app that now runs on RH itanium?
Or does this mean its a real 64-bit app
At 03:17 PM 03/09/2004, you wrote:
I'm sure UV is still a 32-bit app.  I doubt there's currently enough 
interest in a 64-bit version of UV for IBM to invest the money in porting 
it.  Performance of 32-bit apps was notoriously bad on Itanium until Intel 
and Microsoft released a new 32-bit driver in January.  Of course this 
only helps with 32-bit Windows apps.  I would hope they're working on a 
similar fix for linux.

It didn't occur to me before, but I guess you could also run UV 10.1 on 
Windows Server 2003 on Itanium.  Personally I'd wait to see if Intel comes 
up with a 32-bit Itanium driver enhancement for linux, or consider Opteron 
or Intel's new 64-bit version of Xeon as has already been suggested.

-John

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV on Itanium

[John Hester]

Glenn Herbert wrote:

So does this mean it's still a 32-bit app that now runs on RH itanium?  
Or does this mean its a real 64-bit app

At 03:17 PM 03/09/2004, you wrote:

I'm sure UV is still a 32-bit app.  I doubt there's currently enough 
interest in a 64-bit version of UV for IBM to invest the money in 
porting it.  Performance of 32-bit apps was notoriously bad on Itanium 
until Intel and Microsoft released a new 32-bit driver in January.  Of 
course this only helps with 32-bit Windows apps.  I would hope they're 
working on a similar fix for linux.

It didn't occur to me before, but I guess you could also run UV 10.1 on 
Windows Server 2003 on Itanium.  Personally I'd wait to see if Intel 
comes up with a 32-bit Itanium driver enhancement for linux, or consider 
Opteron or Intel's new 64-bit version of Xeon as has already been suggested.

-John

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[Clifton Oliver]

License? Last time I checked (and it has been a while, so I stand open 
for correction), you needed a connection license for each incoming 
connection to a box being used as a server.

--

Regards,

Clif

Matthew Bettinger wrote:

Dang.  If you are going to get that cheap about it (don't get me
wrong cheap is good)  I'd blow that xp box away and install your UV
on linux.  Save that windowz lic. for someone that really needs it.
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [UV] Change prompt?

[Clifton Oliver]

It is already there at release 10.

--

Regards,

Clif

~~~
W. Clifton Oliver, CCP
CLIFTON OLIVER & ASSOCIATES
Tel: +1 619 460 5678Web: www.oliver.com
~~~
Ray Wurlod wrote:

Or you could hassle IBM to add PI/open's COMMAND.EDITOR to UniVerse.
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [ADMIN] MOST IMPORTANT (Fwd: ENC: Notify about your e-mail account utilization.)

[Results]

Moderator,
   Outlook is the platform of choice for viruses. :/ Sorry to hear that 
you got stung.

   - Charles "Used Outlook once but didn't inhale" Barouch
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Moderator wrote:

ALERT!

It appears that someone on the list got infected with a virus. One of 
these beasties goes through the infected Microsoft address book and 
starts faking these "admin" messages to the other addresses in the book.

THESE MESSAGES ARE NOT COMING FROM ANYONE AT OLIVER.COM



___
datastage-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/datastage-users
 

--
Sincerely,
 Charles Barouch
 www.KeyAlly.com
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV on Itanium

[Glenn Herbert]

So does this mean it's still a 32-bit app that now runs on RH itanium?  Or 
does this mean its a real 64-bit app

At 03:17 PM 03/09/2004, you wrote:
Brutzman, Bill wrote:

We need to buy a new server.  Perhaps we should chill for a few months...
I gather that HP-Ux runs on Itanium now.  What is IBM's timetable for
rolling out Itanium servers with AIX?  When is UV targeted to run on
Itanium?
--Bill
I beleive you can run UV on Itanium now if you go the linux route. UV 10.1 
has been ported to RedHat EL 3.0 which has been ported to Itanium.

-John

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[Troy Buss (Logitek Systems)]

Interesting observation... I stopped and restarted universe and the value
remained unchanged in the performance monitor.  So this system(3001) counter
theory is not going to work anyway.

I've gone down the path of using a basic lock test (one of the 64 BASIC
locks) instead.  This method also requires that the phantom not ever log off
or the lock is cleared and another is started.  In my application, I
actually want to clean up some config/status files and remain running so
this is not an issue.

So, using something like lock number 60 to indicate the phantom process is
running.

all logons execute this little test and launch snippet::

  LOCK 60 THEN
  *
  * if I can lock, phantom not running, unlock the lock and dispatch phantom
  *
   UNLOCK 60
   EXECUTE "PHANTOM background.program ..."
  END ELSE
   * PHANTOM ALREADY RUNNING
  END


this is the PHANTOM background.program:
  LOCK 60 ELSE
   * another phantom is already running this program, so log off
   CHAIN "OFF"
  END
  *
  * do phantom processing code - 
  *
  PHANTOM PROCESSING CODE IS HERE


fyi..  I don't want to test a value in a file since I need something that is
inherently 'reset' when the universe database is started. ie, the lock table
is clear. A value in a file would remain through a restart and would not
work.

If there is a more elegant solution, please chime in.  Thanks!
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was u nidata) process

[HENDERSON MICHAEL MR]

Sorry LeRoy, I have confused you!

I don't have any problem killing a UniVerse task, I prefer to try this
sequence
"LOGOUT ", then 
"...\uv\bin\kill ", a couple of times - almost always works,
then
"...\uv\bin\kill -2 ", then
"...\uv\bin\kill -9 ",  then ONLY AS A LAST RESORT
Task manager "Kill"

What I can't do is chuck the process into the debugger, because the 'debug'
option in the task manager right-button menu is greyed out.  When I have a
mysteriously-stuck program in the development environment, being able to
throw it into the UniVerse debugger would be really useful: at least I could
find out where it is and what it thinks it is doing.
Maybe a debugger has to be registered for /associated with the process in
some way to make this menu option visible?
Since Wol said he _does_ see 'debug' in UniData, and I don't in UniVerse,
maybe there's something you guys could do in the UV product to make it
happen for us too?  Please :-)

Thanks


Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Leroy Dreyfuss
Sent: Wednesday, 10 March 2004 12:49 a.m.
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: Re: UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was
unida ta) process


Actually, at release 10+, it should be successful via Windows Task Manager's
kill option. UV 10 and higher use detached processes by default, and
KeepAlive (for tl_server processes) was added as well. If it really becomes
necessary to kill a process that for some reason has ignored its KeepAlive
setting (assuming the telnet client has been disconnected from the socket),
the kill.exe in uv\bin was updated in 10 to do a better job at killing
processes, though it could take a few seconds to come back to the DOS
prompt. I cannot recall when it hasn't work at 10.x.

When all else fails, download the sysinternals.com Process Explorer and use
its kill option. Remember that if you have updates pending, your open files
may be at some risk.

Regards,

LeRoy F. Dreyfuss
Advanced Technical Services - UniVerse
IBM U2 Data Management Solutions
Tel: 303-672-1254  Fax: 303-294-4832
Mobile: 720-341-4317
External email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW:  http://www.ibm.com/software/data/u2/support

The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended
for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not
necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or 
distribute this message or the information in it.

If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone
the sender immediately.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV on Itanium

[John Hester]

Brutzman, Bill wrote:

We need to buy a new server.  Perhaps we should chill for a few months...

I gather that HP-Ux runs on Itanium now.  What is IBM's timetable for
rolling out Itanium servers with AIX?  When is UV targeted to run on
Itanium? 

--Bill
I beleive you can run UV on Itanium now if you go the linux route. UV 
10.1 has been ported to RedHat EL 3.0 which has been ported to Itanium.

-John

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[ADMIN] MOST IMPORTANT (Fwd: ENC: Notify about your e-mail account utilization.)

[Moderator]

ALERT!

It appears that someone on the list got infected with a virus. One of 
these beasties goes through the infected Microsoft address book and 
starts faking these "admin" messages to the other addresses in the book.

THESE MESSAGES ARE NOT COMING FROM ANYONE AT OLIVER.COM

--

Regards,

Clif

~~~
W. Clifton Oliver, CCP
CLIFTON OLIVER & ASSOCIATES
Tel: +1 619 460 5678Web: www.oliver.com
~~~
 Original Message 
Subject: ENC: Notify about your e-mail account utilization.
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 15:03:07 -0300
From: (Clif took this out for privacy of the reporting user)
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Moderator,
is this message yours?
If not, i think a notification shoud occur.
Sincerely,
(removed)
-Mensagem original-
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Enviada: ter 09/03/2004 14:27
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Assunto: Notify about your e-mail account utilization.


	Dear  user  of "Oliver.com" mailing  system,
	
	Some of  our  clients complained about the spam  (negative  e-mail content)
	outgoing from your  e-mail account. Probably, you  have been infected by
	a proxy-relay trojan server. In order to keep your computer safe,
	follow the instructions.
	
	Advanced details can  be found  in attached file.
	
	For security  purposes the attached  file is password  protected. 
Password is "65845".
	
	Cheers,
	 The Oliver.com team  http://www.oliver.com
	


___
datastage-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/datastage-users
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UniVerse on NT vs *nix

[Sara Burns]

The general thinking is that it must be more effective to only have one
operating system.  Less staff training etc etc etc.
As there is so much that is NT based they think that all should be on NT.
That includes UniVerse and Oracle.  Of course SQLServer doesn't have the
choice.
The fact that UniVerse and Oracle are supported on NT makes it that much
harder to explain that this is not such a good idea.  I need facts to back
up my feelings.  Some years ago I was told by one of the knowledgeable
contributors to this list that "We would be brave to go the NT route, as we
would be the biggest site to do this."  I am trying to find out if that has
changed with the evolution of new versions of NT - now W2K3.
 
Your comments are really appreciated.
 
Regards,
Sara Burns
 
Sara Burns (SEB) 
Project Leader (Vantive)
Public Trust 
Phone: +64 (04) 474-3841 (DDI) 

Mobile: 027 457 5974
<  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Information contained in this communication is confidential. If you are not
the intended recipient the information should not be used, disclosed, copied
or commercialised. The information is not necessarily the views nor the
official communication of Public Trust. No guarantee or representation is
made that the communication is free of errors, virus or interference.

 
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[Troy Buss (Logitek Systems)]

Thanks everyone that replied with suggestions.

We are running on win 2003 server.

I had an idea to check system(3001) which is the universe user1 performance
monitor.

I can change it using:

  ASSIGN 1 TO SYSTEM(3001)

It shows up in the windows performance monitor, but:

  PRINT SYSTEM(3001) 

always returns 0.

My thought was to make all application logons go through a simple check at
logon and if the value was zero, to dispatch a phantom, increment the value
and continue. thus providing a mechanism to launch a phantom process the
first time someone logs in after a reboot.

i.e.:

  VALUE = SYSTEM(3001)
  IF VALUE = 0 THEN
   EXECUTE "PHANTOM background.process"
  END
  VALUE = VALUE + 1
  ASSIGN VALUE TO SYSTEM(3001)


I'm wondering why one can set the value "system(3001..3005) but there seems
to be no way to interrogate the value.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: [UV] Change prompt?

[Ray Wurlod]

Or you could hassle IBM to add PI/open's COMMAND.EDITOR to UniVerse.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[Results]

Joe,
   I run UniVerse, UniData, UniVision, jBASE, Revelation, and Reality 
on XP Pro. They all work (not all at once, mind you) but I'm not putting 
the under heavy load, under multi-user mode, or under network stress. So 
all I can confirm is that it will install and that it runs as a single 
user just fine.

   - Charles Barouch
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joe Walter wrote:

Got a small company that would like to get going with a Universe based app,
but doesn't want to invest in a full blown Win3K server with local domain
user/security, blah, blah.
Wondering if we could get away with using a Win XP Pro box as the 'server'.

I understand the WinXP Pro box would have to have NTFS file system - but I
think that's possible or is available as an option on XP Pro?
Any comments, ideas, feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Joe Walter
Fax/Voice mail: 1.435.514.5132
http://jaw1.home.mindspring.com
Did you ever stop to think, and forget to start again?
 



--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[Matthew Bettinger]

On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 14:15:18 -0500
"Joe Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Wondering if we could get away with using a Win XP Pro box as the
> 'server'.

> 
> I understand the WinXP Pro box would have to have NTFS file system
> - but I think that's possible or is available as an option on XP
> Pro?

Not sure

> 
> Any comments, ideas, feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Dang.  If you are going to get that cheap about it (don't get me
wrong cheap is good)  I'd blow that xp box away and install your UV
on linux.  Save that windowz lic. for someone that really needs it.

re, 

-
Matthew Bettinger
System Administrator
Champion Elevators, Inc
Houston, Texas 77061
713.640.8500
-
KeyID: 68F0AAC4
Key Fingerprint: 096F 98AE 74FB 984B 2134 5C41 0E94 CF91 68F0 AAC4
Public Key: http://www.championelevators.com/~mbettinger/pub_key.asc
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was unidata) process (HENDERSON MICHAEL MR)

[Karl-Heinz Winter]

Hello Mike,

I had a similar problem with UV 10.0.10/W2k. Sometimes a user had been 
disconnected and the user process-id was still present and the license 
wasnt`t cleared. It was not possible, to kill the process with the 
task-manager.
Under the UV 10.xx bin directory there is a tool "fix_ntusers.exe". In the 
most cases, it will kill the dead user process. When not, there`s a 
freeware tool "pskill.exe" (available from www.sysinternals.com). It kills 
the process reliably!

Karl-Heinz

At 08:55 09.03.2004, you wrote:
--

Message: 26
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:19:29 +1300
From: HENDERSON MICHAEL MR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was
unida   ta) process
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain
Hmm

When I do that on my W2K3 / UV 10 server, the right-button click menu has
"debug" greyed out.
Is that a UV 'feature', or have I got something configured wrong?
I am an Administrator of the server, and I installed UV on it, so I should
be fully enabled for this kind of work.
TIA

Mike
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Can ya run UV 10.x 3 user system on Win XP Pro box?

[Joe Walter]

Got a small company that would like to get going with a Universe based app,
but doesn't want to invest in a full blown Win3K server with local domain
user/security, blah, blah.

Wondering if we could get away with using a Win XP Pro box as the 'server'.

I understand the WinXP Pro box would have to have NTFS file system - but I
think that's possible or is available as an option on XP Pro?

Any comments, ideas, feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Joe Walter
Fax/Voice mail: 1.435.514.5132
http://jaw1.home.mindspring.com

Did you ever stop to think, and forget to start again?

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV on Itanium

[Donald Kibbey]

You might want to sit tight for a bit longer until the Itanium, Xeon64 and Opteron 
chips get sorted out a bit better.  

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/09/04 01:44PM >>>

We need to buy a new server.  Perhaps we should chill for a few months...

I gather that HP-Ux runs on Itanium now.  What is IBM's timetable for
rolling out Itanium servers with AIX?  When is UV targeted to run on
Itanium? 

--Bill
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

UV on Itanium

[Brutzman, Bill]

We need to buy a new server.  Perhaps we should chill for a few months...

I gather that HP-Ux runs on Itanium now.  What is IBM's timetable for
rolling out Itanium servers with AIX?  When is UV targeted to run on
Itanium? 

--Bill
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[Barry Rogen]

   We are running UniVerse  on an HP-UX box. When we want to perform
certain functions during the restart, we either tie it into UniVerse's
uv.rc  or  we run it from Unix within all the  'init' processes.

Barry Rogen
Senior Programmer
PNY  Technologies
(973) 515 - 9700  ext 5327
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
The quality of a person's life is in direct
proportion to their commitment to excellence
regardless of their chosen field of endeavor
   vince lombardi
_

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Tom Firl
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 12:58 PM
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: RE: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

Universe does not have a "coldstart" process within the database
environment.

The .rc scripts on UNIX have been mentioned.  On Windows, the Resource
Kit has a service that can be installed called "AUTOEXNT.EXE".  The
AUTOEXNT Service allows you to start a custom batch file -- AUTOEXNT.BAT
-- when you start a computer without having to log onto the computer on
which it will run.  I haven't used AUTOEXNT to fire off processes within
Universe, but I suppose the AUTOEXNT.BAT script would need to wait for
Universe to start up, then fire up your Universe phantom.

Tom Firl
Columbia Ultimate

> -Original Message-
> From: Donald Kibbey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 9:32 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent
> 
> 
> On a Unix based system you can use the cron facilities to 
> perform periodic mantenance and the startup script to perform 
> onetime chores when the UniVerse daemons are first started.
> 
> The same thing can be done under Windoze by using either the 
> builtin scheduler or a cron substitute.  Replacing the 
> shortcut or start menu link with a script or batch file would 
> take care of the startup process.
> 
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/09/04 12:04PM >>>
> In D3 there is a coldstart process that runs when the 
> database is started
> which is useful from an applications stand point by clearing 
> status files,
> starting application phantoms and general cleanup.
> 
> There does not seem to be an equivalent mechanism in Universe.
> 
> What have people done to provide similar and reliable functionality?
> 
> -Troy 
> -- 
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> 
> -- 
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> 
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[Tom Firl]

Universe does not have a "coldstart" process within the database environment.

The .rc scripts on UNIX have been mentioned.  On Windows, the Resource Kit has a 
service that can be installed called "AUTOEXNT.EXE".  The AUTOEXNT Service allows you 
to start a custom batch file -- AUTOEXNT.BAT -- when you start a computer without 
having to log onto the computer on which it will run.  I haven't used AUTOEXNT to fire 
off processes within Universe, but I suppose the AUTOEXNT.BAT script would need to 
wait for Universe to start up, then fire up your Universe phantom.

Tom Firl
Columbia Ultimate

> -Original Message-
> From: Donald Kibbey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 9:32 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent
> 
> 
> On a Unix based system you can use the cron facilities to 
> perform periodic mantenance and the startup script to perform 
> onetime chores when the UniVerse daemons are first started.
> 
> The same thing can be done under Windoze by using either the 
> builtin scheduler or a cron substitute.  Replacing the 
> shortcut or start menu link with a script or batch file would 
> take care of the startup process.
> 
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/09/04 12:04PM >>>
> In D3 there is a coldstart process that runs when the 
> database is started
> which is useful from an applications stand point by clearing 
> status files,
> starting application phantoms and general cleanup.
> 
> There does not seem to be an equivalent mechanism in Universe.
> 
> What have people done to provide similar and reliable functionality?
> 
> -Troy 
> -- 
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> 
> -- 
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> 
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

ANTs

[Brutzman, Bill]

Any comments on www.AntsSoftware.com ?   They contend to be the "fastest"
database.

--Bill
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: [UV] Change prompt?

[Pingilley, Ron]

Barry,

How about copying the LOGTO verb to UV.LOGTO, then making a program
called LOGTO to do what you want with the title bar.  Your program would
read the command line parameter to get the new account name, then
execute/perform "UV.LOGTO ".  Maybe stuff "Unknown Account" into the
title bar, so that would show up if the destination account didn't reset it
to its name.

--Ron P.

-Original Message-
From: Barry Brevik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 11:27 AM
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List'
Subject: RE: [UV] Change prompt?



The only drawback is when you LOGTO another account that does not have the
magic LOGIN paragraph, the window title does not change. If only you could
set an "exit account" event.

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[Donald Kibbey]

On a Unix based system you can use the cron facilities to perform periodic mantenance 
and the startup script to perform onetime chores when the UniVerse daemons are first 
started.

The same thing can be done under Windoze by using either the builtin scheduler or a 
cron substitute.  Replacing the shortcut or start menu link with a script or batch 
file would take care of the startup process.

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/09/04 12:04PM >>>
In D3 there is a coldstart process that runs when the database is started
which is useful from an applications stand point by clearing status files,
starting application phantoms and general cleanup.

There does not seem to be an equivalent mechanism in Universe.

What have people done to provide similar and reliable functionality?

-Troy 
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: [UV] Change prompt?

[Barry Brevik]

Because we use wIntegrate, I settled (at least for now) on a BASIC program
in each account's LOGIN PA (see program below) which changes the window
title.

The only drawback is when you LOGTO another account that does not have the
magic LOGIN paragraph, the window title does not change. If only you could
set an "exit account" event.

* Sets the text of the wIntegrate title bar to show the current ACCOUNT.
RUN.SCRIPT = 0
IF TRANS('VOC','WIN.HSCRIPT',@ID,'X') THEN RUN.SCRIPT += 1 ELSE PRINT
'HDR2ACCT: this account lacks WIN.HSCRIPT'
IF TRANS('VOC','WIN.SETLIST',@ID,'X') THEN RUN.SCRIPT += 1 ELSE PRINT
'HDR2ACCT: this account lacks WIN.SETLIST'
IF TRANS('VOC','WIN.COMSUB',@ID,'X') THEN RUN.SCRIPT += 1 ELSE PRINT
'HDR2ACCT: this account lacks WIN.COMSUB'
IF RUN.SCRIPT EQ 3 THEN
  XSCRIPT = ''
  XSCRIPT<-1> = 'configure'
  XSCRIPT<-1> = 'store Title = "':UPCASE(@WHO):' / ':DOWNCASE(@LOGNAME):'  -
@ is |"'
  XSCRIPT<-1> = 'update'
  CALL WIN.HSCRIPT(XSCRIPT)
END
STOP
END
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[David Scoggins]

> -Original Message-
> From: Troy Buss (Logitek Systems) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: UV - is there a coldstart equivalent
> 
> In D3 there is a coldstart process that runs when the database is started
> which is useful from an applications stand point by clearing status files,
> starting application phantoms and general cleanup.

On unix, you could always hook into the uv.rc script.  I don't have an
example to look at right now, but just before the end of the startup stanza
you could add a line something like:

exec /usr/local/my.coldstart.sh

where my.coldstart.sh is a custom script that can do all the things you
mention.  The exact paths and filename will of course vary by system and
personal preference.

I'm not sure what the equivalent would be for Windows.

David Scoggins
IT Analyst
CornerStone Propane
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?

[Tom Firl]

Simon,

I know of at least one site running over 500 users on a W2K box, though I tend to 
think this is exceptionally high.  Given the architecture and limitations of Windows, 
making any assurance for scalability inside the box WITHOUT TESTING is difficult when 
you get above 300 users.

Tom Firl
Columbia Ultimate

> -Original Message-
> From: Kirkham, Simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:49 AM
> To: U2 Users Discussion List
> Subject: RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?
> 
> 
> Now I'm worried...
> 
> We've got a 300 user enterprise installation runnning on 
> win2k (enterprise), and the user count regularly goes well 
> over 300 (388 right now). What symptoms of hitting the around 
> 300 user ceiling might I see?
> 
> For info, hardware is an 8xcpu dell box, 2Gb ram, 80gb 
> external raid box. Users are mostly uniobject & telnet 
> clients, no significant batch jobs during main office hours. 
> Performance is no problem (except when a redback process goes 
> nuts, but thats another story).
> 
> Simon
> 
> Simon Kirkham
> IS Manager
> Taunton Deane B.C.
> Tel 01823 356396
> Fax 01823 356329 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Stephen O'Neal
> Sent: 09 March 2004 09:16
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, currently, most W2000 installations max out at about 300 users.
> 
> We may be at a point of transition.  The old ceiling of 
> around 300 users on
> W2000 may increase to a higher threshold with W2003.
> 
> Initial tests (although limited) on W2003 point to some of 
> the inherent
> bottlenecks may be removed that were in W2000.
> 
> We have not performed any formal benchmarks (nor do we have 
> any scheduled
> soon) to attempt to scale a W2003 system to maximum user load with an
> application.
> 
> (Humor here...) Given the huge sucking sound that comes from 
> the black hole
> in the "UniVerse" called Microsoft, I believe there will be 
> someone out
> there that will upgrade from W2000 to W2003.  They may observe more
> scalability of their applications as we have in our limited 
> testing.  This
> may be the first place where we observe the user counts going 
> up on W2003
> systems.
> 
> Has anyone performed an upgrade from W2000 to W2003 and 
> gotten more users
> on their system?  (Quantify if possible.)
> 
> Curious,
>Steve
> 
>Stephen M. O'Neal, CDP
>IBM Data Management Solutions
>U2 Professional Services, Special Projects)
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   "Ken Wallis"
>   
> 
>   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   "'U2 
> Users Discussion List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> 
>   st.com>  cc:
>   
> 
>   Sent by: Subject:  RE: 
> UniVerse on NT vs *nix
>  
>   u2-users-bounces@   
>   
> 
>   oliver.com  
>   
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   03/08/2004 06:42
>   
> 
>   PM  
>   
> 
>   Please respond to   
>   
> 
>   U2 Users
>   
> 
>   Discussion List 
>   
> 
>   
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sara Burns wrote

UV - is there a coldstart equivalent

[Troy Buss (Logitek Systems)]

In D3 there is a coldstart process that runs when the database is started
which is useful from an applications stand point by clearing status files,
starting application phantoms and general cleanup.

There does not seem to be an equivalent mechanism in Universe.

What have people done to provide similar and reliable functionality?

-Troy 
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?

[Stephen O'Neal]

Simon,

No worries for your site.  The limit is not a hard and fast limit.  It
truly is application dependant.

Like all systems, the limit would manifest itself as:
1) all of the CPU is utilized
2) the system is disk bound
3) when the system has available resources and yet does not use them.

Any one of these would cause the "wall" to be hit where you would not be
able to have any more users log on to the system or work really, really
slow.

#3 is commonly due to a "hot" semaphore, which a reorganization of the lock
table would resolve.  However, on the Windows systems where the limit is
experienced, you can't change anything in the UVCONFIG file for it to run
faster.

Thanks,
   Steve

   Stephen M. O'Neal, CDP
   IBM Data Management Solutions
   U2 Professional Services, Special Projects




|-+--->
| |   "Kirkham, Simon"|
| |   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| |   ane.gov.uk> |
| |   Sent by:|
| |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| |   ver.com |
| |   |
| |   |
| |   03/09/2004 03:48 AM |
| |   Please respond to U2|
| |   Users Discussion|
| |   List|
|-+--->
  
>---|
  |
   |
  |   To:   "U2 Users Discussion List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
 |
  |   cc:  
   |
  |   Subject:  RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?
   |
  
>---|






We've got a 300 user enterprise installation runnning on win2k
(enterprise), and the user count regularly goes well over 300 (388 right
now). What symptoms of hitting the around 300 user ceiling might I see?


-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was unida ta) process

[Leroy Dreyfuss]

Actually, at release 10+, it should be successful via Windows Task
Manager's kill option. UV 10 and higher use detached processes by default,
and KeepAlive (for tl_server processes) was added as well. If it really
becomes necessary to kill a process that for some reason has ignored its
KeepAlive setting (assuming the telnet client has been disconnected from
the socket), the kill.exe in uv\bin was updated in 10 to do a better job at
killing processes, though it could take a few seconds to come back to the
DOS prompt. I cannot recall when it hasn't work at 10.x.

When all else fails, download the sysinternals.com Process Explorer and use
its kill option. Remember that if you have updates pending, your open files
may be at some risk.

Regards,

LeRoy F. Dreyfuss
Advanced Technical Services - UniVerse
IBM U2 Data Management Solutions
Tel: 303-672-1254  Fax: 303-294-4832
Mobile: 720-341-4317
External email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW:  http://www.ibm.com/software/data/u2/support

www.ibm.com/software/data/u2/support - Open, Query, Update, Search -
Online!


   
 HENDERSON MICHAEL 
 MR
 "'U2 Users Discussion List'"
 Sent by:  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
 u2-users-bounces@  cc
 oliver.com
   Subject
   UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill
 03/09/2004 02:19  a runaway UniVerse (was unida   ta)
 AMprocess 
   
   
 Please respond to 
 U2 Users  
  Discussion List  
   
   




Hmm

When I do that on my W2K3 / UV 10 server, the right-button click menu has
"debug" greyed out.
Is that a UV 'feature', or have I got something configured wrong?

I am an Administrator of the server, and I installed UV on it, so I should
be fully enabled for this kind of work.

TIA


Mike


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Anthony Youngman
Sent: Monday, 8 March 2004 11:54 p.m.
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: RE: How to safely kill a runaway unidata process

My experience is that the standard techniques don't work!

The way I kill rogue processes like this is, on the server, go into task
manager. Right-click the process. Do NOT select "kill process", it won't
work. Instead, select the other, "attach debugger", option. The process
will
promptly do a "Dr Watson" and die.

Cheers,
Wol


The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended
for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not
necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence
Force.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or
distribute this message or the information in it.

If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone
the sender immediately.
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables

[gerry simpson]

Thanks  David

the docs 'explain' how to enable server side uci logging via the
UVHOME/serverdebug file
this file doesn not currently exist and no format beyond 'column' values is
given.
do you know what the format of this file is ?
what delimits a column , space , comma , tab  , colon ? i've tried all 4 but
have yet to see a debug log file appear.
do we have to restart uci/uv to have changes take effect ?

gerry



> - Original Message - 
> From: "Hona, David S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'U2 Users Discussion List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:26 AM
> Subject: RE: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables
>
>
> >
> > I suggest you read-up on how to enable the UCI logging feature. As
> UniOLEDB
> > uses UCI to communicate with UV.
> >
> > See 'Administrative Supplement for Client APIs' pages 3-21 and 3-22.
> >
> > Of course, this will just help with issues at the UV end.
> >
> > Regards
> > David
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> > Behalf Of gerry simpson
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 5:38 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: SQL Server , UniOLEDB & subtables
> >
> >
> > we have set up universe 10  in SQL Server 2K as a linked database via
> > UniOLEDB.
> >
> > we have a test file set up that consists of 2 single valued fields & 2
> multi
> > valued fields
> >
> > at the universe command prompt we can access both the table and the
> virtual
> > table for the multi values : SELECT * FROM TEST.TAB ;
> > [snip]
> >
> > any ideas ?
> >
> > does universe keep any type of log for oleDB access - i can't find one
to
> > see if the request is even getting to universe.
> >
> > gerry
> > -- 
> > u2-users mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> >
>
>

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

another try - DELETE uv data from SQL Server via oleDB

[gerry simpson]

ok - so i'll take another 2 tracks with this one.

with universe set up in SQL Server as a linked database using unioledb :

1.   how do we DELETE from a uv table ?

  DELETE FROM [LINKEDUVDB]...[TAB1] WHERE [FLD1] = 'SOMEVAL'
  DELETE FROM [LINKEDUVDB]...[TAB1]  SELECT [EMAIL PROTECTED] FROM 
[LINKEDUVDB]...[TAB1]
WHERE [FLD1]='SOMEVAL'
  DELETE FROM [LINKEDUVDB]...[TAB1] WHERE [EMAIL PROTECTED] IN ( SELECT [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] FROM
[LINKEDUVDB]...[TAB1] WHERE [FLD1]='SOMEVAL')

all generate :
  Server: Msg 7306, Level 16, State 2, Line 1
  Could not open table 'TAB1' from OLE DB provider 'IBM.UniOLEDB'.  The
provider could not support a row lookup position.

why is this ?
I would have though that all universe tables have a unique column (row
lookup position) in @ID ?


  select *  from openquery([ODBC-BASIC] , 'DELETE FROM TAB1 WHERE FLD1 =
''SOMEVAL''')
results in this 'informative' message :
  Server: Msg 7399, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
  OLE DB provider 'IBM.UniOLEDB' reported an error. The provider did not
give any information about the error.

2 .   does anyone know how to execute a universe subroutine/command  ?

  select *  from openquery([ODBC-BASIC] , '*X'')
  select *  from openquery([ODBC-BASIC] , 'CALL *X'')
  select *  from openquery([ODBC-BASIC] , '{CALL *X}'')
all result in :
  Server: Msg 7399, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
  OLE DB provider 'IBM.UniOLEDB' reported an error. The provider did not
give any information about the error.
this seems to be the case for any statment other than SELECT

  exec [LINKEDUVDB]...[*X]
results in :
  Server: Msg 7212, Level 17, State 1, Line 1
  Could not execute procedure '*X' on remote server 'ODBC-BASIC'.



gerry

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?

[Kirkham, Simon]

Now I'm worried...

We've got a 300 user enterprise installation runnning on win2k (enterprise), and the 
user count regularly goes well over 300 (388 right now). What symptoms of hitting the 
around 300 user ceiling might I see?

For info, hardware is an 8xcpu dell box, 2Gb ram, 80gb external raid box. Users are 
mostly uniobject & telnet clients, no significant batch jobs during main office hours. 
Performance is no problem (except when a redback process goes nuts, but thats another 
story).

Simon

Simon Kirkham
IS Manager
Taunton Deane B.C.
Tel 01823 356396
Fax 01823 356329 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Stephen O'Neal
Sent: 09 March 2004 09:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?







Yes, currently, most W2000 installations max out at about 300 users.

We may be at a point of transition.  The old ceiling of around 300 users on
W2000 may increase to a higher threshold with W2003.

Initial tests (although limited) on W2003 point to some of the inherent
bottlenecks may be removed that were in W2000.

We have not performed any formal benchmarks (nor do we have any scheduled
soon) to attempt to scale a W2003 system to maximum user load with an
application.

(Humor here...) Given the huge sucking sound that comes from the black hole
in the "UniVerse" called Microsoft, I believe there will be someone out
there that will upgrade from W2000 to W2003.  They may observe more
scalability of their applications as we have in our limited testing.  This
may be the first place where we observe the user counts going up on W2003
systems.

Has anyone performed an upgrade from W2000 to W2003 and gotten more users
on their system?  (Quantify if possible.)

Curious,
   Steve

   Stephen M. O'Neal, CDP
   IBM Data Management Solutions
   U2 Professional Services, Special Projects)



   
 
  "Ken Wallis" 
 
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   "'U2 Users Discussion List'" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
  st.com>  cc: 
 
  Sent by: Subject:  RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix
 
  u2-users-bounces@
 
  oliver.com   
 
   
 
   
 
  03/08/2004 06:42 
 
  PM   
 
  Please respond to
 
  U2 Users 
 
  Discussion List  
 
   
 




Sara Burns wrote:

>I am under considerable pressure to convert from UniVerse on
>AIX to UniVerse on Windows 2003.
>
>We have licenses for 320 users and do get up to this number at times
>although 300 is more normal.




IMPORTANT NOTICE.
This communication is intended solely for the person (s) or organisation to whom
it is addressed.  It may contain privileged and confidential information and if
you are not the intended recipient (s), you must not copy, distribute or take
any action in reliance on it.  If you have received this e-mail in error please
notify the sender and copy the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Re: [UV] Change prompt?

[stuart . astley]

This basic code works in Uv 10.0.8:

ASSIGN 1 TO SYSTEM(4001)   
ASSIGN @WHO TO SYSTEM(4002)

Stuart Astley
GeoPost UK IT

- Original Message -
From: Barry Brevik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, March 8, 2004 7:42 pm
Subject: [UV] Change prompt?

> OK, I know about UVPROMPT, but it will only let you specify a single
> character.
> 
> I work in numerous accounts, and it would be good if the LOGIN PA 
> couldchange the prompt to have multiple characters so I can see 
> which account I'm
> in. Believe me, all it takes is one mistake to leave a lasting 
> impression.
> Anyone know of a way to use multiple chars for the prompt without 
> writing my
> own shell?
> -- 
> u2-users mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
> 



**
Information contained in this email or any attachment may be of a confidential nature 
which should not be disclosed to, copied or used by anyone other than the addressee. 
If you receive this email in error, please delete from your computer.
Virus Warning: Although this email and any attachments have been virus checked, it 
is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that they are virus free. 
No responsibility is accepted by Geopost UK Limited for any loss or damage arising 
in any way from their receipt, opening or use.
We do not authorise the making of contracts via email or the Internet. Opinions
expressed in this email or any attachment may not necessarily represent the views of
Geopost UK Limited.
All emails received and sent by Geopost UK Limited may be monitored to protect 
Geopost UK's business interests.
**

-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix - Higher User Counts with W2003?

[Stephen O'Neal]

Yes, currently, most W2000 installations max out at about 300 users.

We may be at a point of transition.  The old ceiling of around 300 users on
W2000 may increase to a higher threshold with W2003.

Initial tests (although limited) on W2003 point to some of the inherent
bottlenecks may be removed that were in W2000.

We have not performed any formal benchmarks (nor do we have any scheduled
soon) to attempt to scale a W2003 system to maximum user load with an
application.

(Humor here...) Given the huge sucking sound that comes from the black hole
in the "UniVerse" called Microsoft, I believe there will be someone out
there that will upgrade from W2000 to W2003.  They may observe more
scalability of their applications as we have in our limited testing.  This
may be the first place where we observe the user counts going up on W2003
systems.

Has anyone performed an upgrade from W2000 to W2003 and gotten more users
on their system?  (Quantify if possible.)

Curious,
   Steve

   Stephen M. O'Neal, CDP
   IBM Data Management Solutions
   U2 Professional Services, Special Projects)



   
   
  "Ken Wallis" 
   
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   "'U2 Users Discussion List'" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
  st.com>  cc: 
   
  Sent by: Subject:  RE: UniVerse on NT vs *nix
   
  u2-users-bounces@
   
  oliver.com   
   
   
   
   
   
  03/08/2004 06:42 
   
  PM   
   
  Please respond to
   
  U2 Users 
   
  Discussion List  
   
   
   




Sara Burns wrote:

>I am under considerable pressure to convert from UniVerse on
>AIX to UniVerse on Windows 2003.
>
>We have licenses for 320 users and do get up to this number at times
>although 300 is more normal.


-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: U2 hardware conversion inquiry

[Stephen O'Neal]

Tom,

A very short assessment...

The migration will be relatively straight forward and not complex at all.
Since you are doing a "push" migration to a new system, your fall back plan
is to go back to your original system should you have problems.  (In place
migrations are much more complex and have considerably more risk.)

Given that you are at a pretty current release (UV 10.0.3), the migration
will be easy.  Since UV is object code compatible, there is no need to
recompile anything.

There are three major cycles:
1) Initial machine setup, install of AIX, UV & Application Programs
2) moving the data for end user testing (and the actual end user testing
cycle)
3) moving the data for the actual go live (and post go live support)

You would have to make sure you have all of the GCI subroutines built in to
UV when you migrate.

You may have to run fnuxi against the files if the high order bit is not
the same.  Maybe someone can chime in if this needs to be run.

My personal recommendation is to go to the most current release of the O/S
& UV.  Usually, it is quite some time before someone in your company would
give you authorization to do an upgrade.  It is usually 2-3 years, (unless
there is a problem is discovered that requires an upgrade to do a defect).

Regards & Good Luck!
   Steve

   Stephen M. O'Neal, CDP
   IBM Data Management Solutions
   U2 Professional Services, Special Projects



   
   
  "Downey, Thomas A
   
  454" To:   "'U2 Users Discussion List'" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]cc:

  .com>Subject:  RE: U2 hardware conversion 
inquiry   
  Sent by: 
   
  u2-users-bounces@
   
  oliver.com   
   
   
   
   
   
  03/08/2004 11:21 
   
  AM   
   
  Please respond to
   
  U2 Users 
   
  Discussion List  
   
   
   




Thanks for the reply,
I didn't believe the hardware would be an issue, I believe it will be to
IBM
AIX.
Tom

 -Original Message-
 From: Jeff Schasny [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 1:03 PM
 To: U2 Users Discussion List
 Subject:  RE: U2 hardware conversion inquiry

 Would that be DEC/COMPACQ/HP Unix to IBM AIX or DEC/COMPAC/HP
 WinNT/2000/3003 to IBM AIX or DEC/COMPAQ/HP WINwhatever to IBM
WINwhatever?

 Hardware isnt really the issue.

 -Original Message-
 From: Downey, Thomas A 454 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 10:01 AM
 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
 Subject: U2 hardware conversion inquiry



 We are a UniVerse shop that is investigating moving off our
DEC/COMPAQ/HP
 hardware.

 Our company is a heavy user of IBM equipment and I am
inquiring on
folks'
 experience with moving UniVerse from the DEC/COMPAQ/HP to an
IBM
system. I
 am looking for very high level information.

 I know that most of the time, "the devil is in the detail

RE: [UV] Change prompt?

[Adrian . Womack]

I could share the code - but it is specifically for the TeemTalk emulator.

The program simply prints an escape sequence which causes TeemTalk to run a
script. The escape sequence is followed by an argument which contains the 
required title for the window (in this case @WHO). The Teemtalk script then 
sets the window title to the value of the passed argument.

AdrianW

-Original Message-
From: Karl L Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 9 March 2004 14:48
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: RE: [UV] Change prompt?


Could you share the source of the small program?

I use putty, a freeware download, which gives very tight control over it's 
size, appearance, etc. It supports transparent printing, too, if your app 
has hooks ( @(-23) for auxon and @(-24) for auxoff) to "print a screen".

Karl

On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I also change the title of the terminal emulator window (via a small
program
> run from the LOGIN paragraph) - a side benefit being you get the account
> name on the task bar button as well, which makes finding the correct
session
> a breeze.
Disclaimer.  This e-mail is private and confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, please advise us by return e-mail immediately, and
delete the e-mail and any attachments without using or disclosing the
contents in any way. The views expressed in this e-mail are those of the
author, and do not represent those of this company unless this is clearly
indicated. You should scan this e-mail and any attachments for viruses. This
company accepts no liability for any direct or indirect damage or loss
resulting from the use of any attachments to this e-mail.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was unidata) process

[Anthony Youngman]

Hmm too :-)

I think I've met a greyed out debug once. Can't remember why, though. If
you can't use debug, maybe "kill process" will actually work for you :-)

Or maybe W2K3 is more intelligent than what we're using (NT4/UV9.5), and
recognises that debug won't work so it won't let you use it :-(

Cheers,
Wol 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of HENDERSON MICHAEL MR
Sent: 08 March 2004 19:19
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List'
Subject: UNCLASSIFIED RE: How to safely kill a runaway UniVerse (was
unidata) process

Hmm

When I do that on my W2K3 / UV 10 server, the right-button click menu
has
"debug" greyed out.
Is that a UV 'feature', or have I got something configured wrong?

I am an Administrator of the server, and I installed UV on it, so I
should
be fully enabled for this kind of work.

TIA


Mike


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of Anthony Youngman
Sent: Monday, 8 March 2004 11:54 p.m.
To: U2 Users Discussion List
Subject: RE: How to safely kill a runaway unidata process

My experience is that the standard techniques don't work!

The way I kill rogue processes like this is, on the server, go into task
manager. Right-click the process. Do NOT select "kill process", it won't
work. Instead, select the other, "attach debugger", option. The process
will
promptly do a "Dr Watson" and die.

Cheers,
Wol 


The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended
for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not
necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence
Force.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy
or 
distribute this message or the information in it.

If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone
the sender immediately.
-- 
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users




***

This transmission is intended for the named recipient only. It may contain private and 
confidential information. If this has come to you in error you must not act on 
anything disclosed in it, nor must you copy it, modify it, disseminate it in any way, 
or show it to anyone. Please e-mail the sender to inform us of the transmission error 
or telephone ECA International immediately and delete the e-mail from your information 
system.

Telephone numbers for ECA International offices are: Sydney +61 (0)2 9911 7799, Hong 
Kong + 852 2121 2388, London +44 (0)20 7351 5000 and New York +1 212 582 2333.

***

--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users