04-10-2003 06:46 AM
04-10-2003 06:50 AM
1. Many tools in the industry are becoming web-based..
I see it as a security risk and wouldn't accept system configuration via web. Just go java - make it look good! very windowsy/maccy!
2. How important is a terminal user interface, or TUI, in your workday?
Vital. What do you do when the system is in runlevel S rescue.. repair bring up then launch a web based gui to finish off the job??! no way. TUI MUST stay. You need to be able to administer from TUI. CLI reproduction/logging is also vital.
3. What types of system monitoring would be valuable to you?
resources. cpu, log files rotation (ie syslog trimming and clipping etc..) memory leak apps.
4. other features..
stm style info run!
I never saw the point of stm out of sam.. hardware alarms identified, driver versions of hardware elements.. warnings/attentions - related to usage/bottlenecks - links to activation of sar/vmstat/glancy style stuff..
Thanks for the opp to help,
04-10-2003 06:57 AM
2. I could get by with a command line instead. (See above about remembering commands...)
3. Things in Glance.
4. If you can increase the speed, all the better, but see #1.
Hope it helps
04-10-2003 07:12 AM
2. Very. Remote Admin may require this, as I use ssh to access many sites and it's the only port open. X is just too slow through a 128K line ans SSH.
3. Hmmmm, I use my own now, maybe just an interface for iostat, vmstat, and sar.
4. I think LVM is pretty good now, hfs is okay too. Dunno that this needs much help.
I like the http server idea on each server, as I run many now. If it's integrated and kept up to date INCLUDING SSL, I would be happy.
04-10-2003 09:31 AM
1) why not - As long as the 2 others (GUI/txt)still exist because:
2) I use X emulation from my office to do the current tasks but still have to go in machine room to put the support etc... CD's and so use a real console /hp terminal
I would like to sam create a log for each user
using sam (or course the ideal would be like already mentionned - like smit: a separate log for the command and one for the real log)
3) some kernel params (system tables...) would be nice...
4)Why is sam so slow when in LVM?
I personnaly use command because:
a) I cant trust sam when adding disks with my FC connections to HDS bay (although same HW as XP...)
b) because of speed
We all seem to believe online JFS should be incorporated free - it is true that AIX offers their complete JFS with mirroring at no extra cost... I would add mirrorUx
All the best
04-10-2003 10:01 AM
I would be ok with a web-based SAM implementation.
There are occasions when a terminal interface is nice to have. I would be sorry to see it go, especially when using a Windows terminal not running an emulator.
I would like more network monitoring. I might also be inclined to keep SAM open more if I could launch STM and EMS from it.
The ability to integrate more logs and filter sort them could be fun.
04-10-2003 10:07 AM
04-10-2003 10:12 AM
2. I use command line for almost everything. When I need Sam I will ALWAYS use the terminal version because I telnet/ssh to the servers. I only use Sam for things like kernel param tweaks, etc. I want the TUI to be kept around. It uses less system resources than the GUI.
3. I have a view into a couple of my critical servers and constantly monitor cpu, disk, and mem
4. Like the very first response to this thread, I have always found Sam to be a PIA because you can't see the command behind the curtain (like you can w/smitty on AIX using the F6 key). cd'ing to a directory and opening the sam log it rediculous! So... the one thing that I think Sam lacks is THIS!!!
04-10-2003 10:24 AM
Perhaps an embedded GSP web server would be nice?
Regarding LVM, load balancing across alternate paths would be way cool.
04-10-2003 10:45 AM
2. TUI or CLI is absolutely essential. If they are not available, I may have to drive to the system in another state to fix a problem.
3. I'd like to see Glance info and kernel params.
4. Speed is an issue. The "smit" shortcuts would be a good idea.
04-10-2003 10:48 AM
3. The same kind of functions that were added in kcweb would be highly valuable.
04-11-2003 06:14 AM
1. There is no way that I would want a web server loaded on every system and I would be absolutely amazed if this company would even allow it. Like you, I understand that the general push these days is to do everything through a web type interface, but on a personal level I think this is the wrong direction to push for everyday system administration. Just because it is possible to do it with IP doesn???t make it the right move to make. Stay away from it.
2. I saw a reply in the above list that I will have to echo here. I have nothing against the idea of giving the administrators more choices, but don???t take away something that is battle tested and proven to work. That just isn???t a wise thing. Besides, it looks like you want to put even this on the web-based bandwagon. Once again, I don???t support the idea of shoving everything to a web-based interface. It???s just wrong.
3. I think the answer to number three would sound more like a question on my part than an answer. My thought on this is ???What types of monitoring would NOT be valuable to me???? Anything that has to do with my system and its overall health is of interest to me. The more choices you can give me for monitoring the better I will feel. If you do surprise me and give me something I don???t want to see, I will learn to ignore it or simply not pull it up.
4. I don???t know where to go with # 4 that hasn???t already been said. It appears that everybody else has spoken on this. If you will take the time to read them, you will find some very good feedback in the above answers.
I don???t know what my measly little $0.02 will do here in the long run, but since you said you wanted everyone???s input I thought I would chime in.
04-11-2003 06:45 AM
3: Yes some network monitoring would be great
4: Since there is almost evrey thing in SAM -Why not have also an configuration assitant for sendmail? and perhaps also samba (but I know that would mean also less postings on how to...)
Have a good week-end
04-11-2003 07:20 AM
I'm not sure if your team are also responsible for Glance, I would suggest make Glance a default installed bundle instead of a separate software, just like SAM.
The reason is, right now Glance is kind of a must-have tool on HPUX, but some managers/boss don't see the value of it, they refuse to pay more money on it, which makes the life of admins hard. If it comes with HPUX (evenif it's a bit more expensive than before), the boss won't notice that when they purchased at the first place.
I believe there're lots of admins out there have the same situation.
04-11-2003 07:45 AM
1. Not sure whether it would be acceptable to run Apache on all servers.
2. Please don't get rid of the TUI. I only ever use that. I personally don't like the GUI, I find it far too slow.
3. Definitely kernel parameters.
4. I never use sam for LVM work, it's far too slow. In fact I only use it for kernel configuration.
04-11-2003 07:54 AM
1) Web based systems are a good idea. However, its no substitute for a command line. I much, much prefer, however, the X based systems.
2) The only time that I've seen a graphical interface that could do what a text interface could do was in IBM's SMIT utility. And even then, there was only a 90% overlap. Never, ever take away my command line!
3) I wouldn't want a monitoring tool that duplicated MeasureWare or Glance. If you're planning on including these in SAM, then I support it completely.
4)If anything were to be removed from SAM, I'd nominate disk and LVM stuff. I don't see how HP can anticipate everything I ever want to do with my disks, and write a GUI that will handle it. We use a lot of EMC product here, and I don't believe that you'll be able to support it very well at all.
04-11-2003 08:04 AM
LVM with local disks and EMC disks via dual (primary and secondary) paths. When looking at disks in SAM it shows all of my "alternate" path disks as "Unused". I almost had a catastrophy as you can well imagine, thinking I had free disk space.
04-11-2003 01:42 PM
I believe someone suggested a button to capture the background commands.
In any event, the basic concepts were acquired using SAM and the user applied this to understanding what a command line option might be for each function.
So, in the class, teaching by SAM is fine, but in the real world an SA needs to know what is being performed.
One would be a bit lost faced with using a terminal at which SAM was not available.
Have I moaned enough in favor of having a display of the commands being executed in the background?
Thanks for asking.
04-11-2003 11:03 PM
Thanks for asking this question.
1. No. There is no point in running a web server on all servers. If it is absolutely needed, let it be on a one system per subnet / network.
2. TUI is important. some time it is easy to perform certain mundane tasks using a GUI / TUI rather than running a set of commands. And i prefer TUI over GUI because i need X otherwise which eats to my performance / load.
3. i guess glance is there.
and as others have pointed out, for all actions, the exact command with options should be logged so it helps the user understand the tasks and use them in scripts or as needed.
04-12-2003 12:25 AM
I don't load non-essential software or Apache - too many loose ends.
Some things don't work in sam, only in command mode - room for improvement. In system support we use a combination of TUI and GUI - sometimes it's easier to accomplish things in a TUI - also depends a lot on the mode of system access (not always a network connection). LAN console access is valuable as is the TUI (responsive).
04-12-2003 05:01 AM
If "everyone" is smoking crack, does it make sense to join in? Seriously, the only "industry", as in hardware that is left is HP, IBM, and a little from SUN, and as for OS's there's a few unix, linux, bsd, and m$.
I think the SAM team needs to focus on making 'sam' faster and bug free. I can't imagine the SAM team staying on top of patching Apache when exploits are found.
If you made the display interface java capable, then you wouldn't need a web server!
''2. How important is a terminal user interface, or TUI, in your workday?''
If I don't have network capability for some reason or another, or if the server is in one of my DMZ's, then I need access to the SERIAL port ONLY!! We don't punch holes through firewalls and routers just to make someone's job a little easier.
''3. What types of system monitoring would be valuable to you? (e.g. HP-UX 11.22 allows some kernel parameters to be monitored)''
This is a job for Measureware, NOT "sam"! Of course I could change my attitude, if you were going to merge Measureware and sam together and give it away for free!
''4. Concerning disk and file system management (LVM included), we plan to address speed and LVM support.''
Well, if you are going to go for #3 you might as well just merge STM (xstm) and SAM together and do more visual representations of systems, disk drives, how they are being used under the vg & lv's, ...
live free or die
04-15-2003 05:40 AM
2. In the graphical world a
piture of devices and their level of utilization would be
a major improvement.
3. Intelligent monitoring of storage for sam (rate of increase across time). Just write a status file and compare. /d00x is X size and Y% full increasing at an average of Z/period.
04-15-2003 07:10 AM
Network monitoring, specifically being able to tie a socket port number (like from netstat -t) to a PID. I can do this in linux (netstat -p). It helps to be able to find, for example, a runaway process that is creating one socket after another.
Better network error monitoring would be useful. I can do netstat -s at the command line, and save it to a file, do it again a minute or two later and then run diff against the two files and interpret the results to see how many tcp errors are being generated. This is very cumbersome, particulary while under the stress of trying to pinpoint which system is bogging down the lan. Being able to monitor errors on an incremental, on-demand basis would be a huge bonus, actually.
Being able to launch lanadmin, xstm, or jetadmin directly from a SAM window would help. Putting X windows tools (xclock, xcalc, xset) to work with third-party X client like Reflections or Exceed would help. Actually, building in agents to work more closely with third-party X clients would be a good thing in HP-UX, not just for SAM.
Also, it be nice to have a more direct method of tying a file system to a physical disk rather than doing vgdisplay -v at the command line and having to rely on knowing what file systems are on what lvols. We are getting ready to install our 5th HP server, and committing this sort of trivia to memeory is getting to be problematic.
There's more, but these are the most obvious ones I see.
04-15-2003 12:09 PM
Think about how many Apache and if IIS(OMG) patches will have to follow to close all the holes.
As for disk mamangement - there has not been alot of work done on the Veritas VxVM side of the fence. I have done a study and determinded its cheaper to go wiht VxVM than with AdvJFS and PowerPath form EMC.
and I am not the smartest cookie on the block. many other cusotmers will figure it out too and go that route. besides you get a lot more features and bang for the buck on VxVM.
as for the UI, maybe think about a Windows client, that ties into SAM server?? that would make more sence.