Re: Suggestions for improving the 7.x OnLine Engine installation and configuration

Nils Myklebust wrote: > David Williams <djw@smooth1.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > :>What would you like to see improved in the 7.x ONCONFIG and operation? > : > : Automatic creation of sqlhosts, automatic addition to /etc/services. > : Program to verify the about (gets $INFORMIXSERVER, checks entry exists > : in $INFORMIXDIR/sqlhosts, does gethostbyname() to check host exists, > : does getservbyname fo check services exists). > > When even the king of configuration and management can want this I may > perhaps also chime in. Although the above haven't been too hard for us > on single machines setup only, we still want it even for that purpose. > We are also soon going to start setting up multiple networked servers > and a tool would make it so much easier. > Well, I think the biggest impression I have from the install is the "right of passage" one goes through, in order to install the software. Maybe it's intentionally a bad install to help keep the consulting market going? I mean this whole idea of having to set up the physical and logical logs is abit absurd. >> I << have to move the logical logs out of the root dbspace? Why put them there in the first place? And the physical logs. I mean why can't this be done at the outset? HELLO! And what of this TEN business? ( tools - engine - network ) This stuff was all cute early on in the romantic phase of Informix software, but does it need to persist like some sort of twisted tradition? I am developing my article on these premises: 1. If the install is acceptable, then why do so many people have so many problems with it? Why can't the distribution change to make it easier to install. What difference should the order of the install make? Tools Engine Network. How about we revise the damn directory structure to make things so this doesn't matter? Please don't give me romantic notions of how we did it in the old days. The old days show me some really silly sh**. 2. If you have good software, this should reduce the need for a help desk. To rave about your customer service is one thing, but ask yourself if the need for more help desk people isn't really an indication that the software is not being properly distributed. ( Yes, Oracle has the same problems, and so do other companies. ) And what about the techlink site? When's the last time somebody did some serious design on <that> mess? 3. If the configuration is acceptable, then why do so many people have problems with it? Is <this> an accurate question? 4. If the configuration and installation are <unacceptable> then why does Informix continue to offer products that are not substantially improved over the last release? Why hasn't the directory structure changed to show improvement? Did we put any thought into the idea that log-files shouldn't go into the software distribution directory? C'mon folks, this is not only sloppy, it's just L A Z Y. 5. Where does the line begin between installation technician and dba? Don't get so smug that you can configure the living daylights out of the 7.x product, and are now an elitist because you chased down more "secrets" of the product than the next guy. It doesn't make you a better DBA to be a configuration expert--you're a better configuration expert but totally distracted from the core responsibility of dba. A data base administrator is concerned with the data not the install. By this I mean log management should be a function of the vendor placing logs in separate dbspaces AT INSTALLATION not running somebody through the ridiculous exersize of moving logs out of one space into another. If you went through this you know how silly this whole exersize is. It's almost a sick joke Informix plays on their customers. And the documentation isn't very clear what the hell you're doing either. Please don't document any more Informix. You've given way too much documentation to this. 6. The ONCONFIG, while a neat idea, is really a bit rigid in what it <CANNOT> do. There's no other way to configure the engine, this is it. But I would think you should be able to bring the engine up, and then phase in the shared memory on a controlled basis. The current method usurps the system without really allowing the DBA or anybody control over the engine. All you can do is clamp down on the memory and hope to God it doesn't bomb. There should be a micro-kernel start-up, and then the ability to ramp up memory. But hey, I could be wrong! :-) ( Where's Sam Kineson when I need him oh! oh! ) > However why not include checking of /etc/hosts and suggestions for > entries in that file (should probably not be entered automatically). This is a good idea. However, it wouldn't be too much to ask for a simple little example of the various types of sqlhost entries. Yes, I've read the f***ing manuals. :-) ( correction, I continue READING the manuals ) > The tool should also check DNS, NIS or whatever the alternate systems > are named to see that communications work and most importantly suggest > exactly what to do. > You're pushing it now. > It's even easy to check what machines are actually out there and let > you select servers from a list. > The tools should of course connect to all machines where you intend to > run Informix servers and do the necessary setup for you. If this is > hard (it shouldn't be) suggested setups should be written to a set of > files on the local machine. > Hmmm... I think the engine guys need to talk to the config guys. > If Informix insist on continuing to supply I-Connect with it's cryptic > setup similar utilities should be included with it. Other tools (you > may know which) hardly need this. > Yes, a hammer. After I get done hitting myself on the thumb 20 times I feel much better. The pain is numbing, but it distracts me enough from these other silly ideas I have. :-) > I also have a feeling that it should be possible to make a tool that > can help you with the begining of tuning ONCONFIG parameters. I relize > that it may be hard, but it should be possible to do something. It > might find out the amount of real memory on the server, ask several > questions about the database and how it's planned to be used and set > up a suggested baseline. Don't get me wrong. ONCONFIG is not really difficult to configure if you know what you're doing. If anything, I find it incomplete. You'll see my suggestions in my April issue of my ezine. I think a little outside suggestions to Informix would be healthy. I like the idea of the ONCONFIG ( like it matters ) it's the extensibility that's lacking. > Additionally it should provide extensive online help that's tailored > to the initial setup it has done. This should explain why the values > where set as they where, what effect the different parameters have, > why you might want to change them, how you might change them and the > effect of changing them. > > Informix have to work on a tool like that anyway to make tuning easy. > A proper tool will of