| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 120.1 | Is this another problem... | SMAUG::BELANGER | Quality is not a mistake! | Fri May 04 1990 14:00 | 17 |
| > MCC> show node4 claudi <<<<<<<<< #1
> Using default ALL IDENTIFIERS
> Node4 4.158 <<<<<<<<< #2
> Identifiers
> AT 3-MAY-1990 16:25:15
>
>
> Examination of Attributes shows:
> Address = 4.158
> Name = CLAUDI
Since the MCC command was "show node4 claudi" (#1), shouldn't the
line which says which entity being looked at also specify this entity
in the same manner as the command was stated (#2). Therefore, the line
"Node4 4.158", should be "Node4 CLAUDI".
~Jon.
|
| 120.2 | RE .0 and .1 | GOSTE::CALLANDER | | Fri May 04 1990 19:10 | 28 |
| RE .1
Okay, here is how things work.
User makes a request, specifying any valid identifier. In this case
Node4 supports both a name and an address identifier. So you could
ask for Node4 claudi or Node4 4.158.
When the AM gets the request it does the action specified, in this
case it was a show all identifiers, and formulates a response. The
MCC SRM states that the entity identifier returned is always the
primary identifier. For Node4 that is the Address.
The PM then displays the returned entity instance, Node4 4.158,
and not the one entered by the user.
RE .0
I don't know why the directory stuff didn't work. I will check into
this to see if there is a problem here. Since the PM converts the
"address" attribute into the "identifiers" attribute partition before
passing the command to the FM, both commands I would have expected
to work. More when I see what is happening.
jill
|
| 120.3 | Directory ... All Identifiers not supported? | TOOK::GUERTIN | Wherever you go, there you are. | Fri May 04 1990 19:33 | 18 |
| re:-1
Jill,
I believe there was a problem with Directory not supporting All
Identifiers. I think you just call it with Null when someone enters
MCC> Dir node4 claudi
Try
MCC> Dir node4 claudi all identifiers
and see if you get back
%MCC-E-NOTFOUND, Dispatch entry for the specified entity does not
If you do, then that explains it. Hopefully, Config will support all
identifiers in the near future. Also, I seem to remember reading
something about this in the release notes.
-Matt.
|
| 120.4 | | NSSG::R_SPENCE | | Fri May 04 1990 19:46 | 11 |
| re: .3
You are right. I did
MCC> dir node4 claudi all identifiers
%MCC-E-NOTFOUND, Dispatch entry for the specified entity does not
exist
MCC>
Sigh... I guess I missed it in the release notes.
s/rob
|
| 120.5 | Action, or not? | TOOK::STRUTT | Colin Strutt | Tue May 08 1990 00:17 | 15 |
| Technical nit.....
Is DIRECTORY an action command or not? If an action command, then
the default ALL IDENTIFIERS should not be provided (in the PM) and
the translation of individual attribute names to the appropriate
partition(s) should not occur (in the PM).
If the PM and FM (Config in this case) both agree that DIRECTORY is
an action directive, then the problem Rob found should not occur.
[Note that this discussion does not presume that DIRECTORY *should* be
an action directive, just pointing out a ramification where it is
*not* an action directive.]
Colin
|
| 120.6 | examine directive "directory" | GOSTE::CALLANDER | | Tue May 08 1990 15:18 | 8 |
| it is currently defined as an examine directive, that is why you
can type "Directory" followed by any attribute/partition/group.
The reason that "directory <name>" works without supplying an
"A" is because the TRM special cases to allow it to pass the
parse without appending the default "all identifiers".
jill
|