Well, I don't have factual knowledge of the VM Automated Operations
product, but I do have practical knowledge.  I installed it on my test
LPAR, and I set OBSERVER on just about all SVMs and Linux machines
that run there.  One of the SVMs receives messages from Linux machines
(using Pipe STARMSG) and it runs fine.  Plus, I can view the console
of this machine though operations manager like any other console it
can watch, and scroll back, enter commands, etc.

The Administration Guide for operations manager just says that you can
set SECUSER or OBSERVER to the manager machine (usually OPMGRM1) but
doesn't say why you'd want to do one or the other.  I think it would
be better if it explained the pros and cons of each, especially why
OBSERVER is better - for the reasons discussed here and that the
observing machine still sees the output even when someone reconnects
to the user.

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 08/20/2008 at 12:50 EDT, Rob van der Heij
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:58 PM, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > Ah, one of the Great Schisms.  See the 3rd from the last paragraph in
> the
>> > description of *MSG in the CP Programming Services book:
>>
>> What troubles me is that the folks in IBM who push the new automated
>> operator product seem to have missed this part of their education.
>> Apparently the documentation suggests that you can simply set secuser
>> all over the place to manage virtual machines. And as we know this
>> breaks the ability for the victim to process *MSG.
>
> I'll have to let someone who has factual knowledge of the product answer
> that question.
>
> Alan Altmark
> z/VM Development
> IBM Endicott
>



-- 
Bruce Hayden
Linux on System z Advanced Technical Support
IBM, Endicott, NY

Reply via email to