[HECnet] Tops-20 SETNOD Failure
Thomas DeBellis
tommytimesharing at gmail.com
Tue May 4 15:15:36 PDT 2021
I fixed a few things in SETNOD to get some more information about the
error. In particular,
* Allow listing of AREA 1 (this was specifically disallowed, I don't
know why)
* More consistent error reporting (via ESOUT%)
* List more than one node when doing an area list (it would only list
a single node)
* List nodes with more than three digits in the node number when doing
columnar output
So now you get the expected results:
SETNOD>lis a 1
[Area 1]
A1RTR 1023 ATHENA 620 ATLE 605 AURORA 606
BANAI 770
BANX25 771 BEA 19 BIZET 800 BJARNE 7 BLINKY
266
CATWZL 302 CLYDE 269 COOPER 263 CRISPS 201
CYGNUS 259
DAVROS 254 DBIT 351 DE1RSX 450 DE1RSY 452
DOCTOR 252
ELIN 616 ELMER 617 ERNIE 2 ERSATZ 350
FLETCH 100
FNATTE 3 FREJ 608 GAXP 730 GNAT 16 GNOME 6
GOBLIN 4 GVAX 731 HAGMAN 262 HARPER 261
HORSE 150
HUGIN 602 HYUNA 500 INKY 268 JIMIN 501
JOCKE 21
JOSSE 17 KLIO 451 KRILLE 8 LOKE 607 MACARO
303
MACRA 258 MAGICA 1 MASTER 251 MIM 13 MUNIN 603
NIPPER 202 NOMAD 610 NOXBIT 720 ORACLE 301
PACMAN 265
PAI 541 PALLAS 621 PAMINA 18 PIDP11 560
PINKY 267
PISTON 520 PLINTH 200 PMAVS2 510 PONDUS 15
PONY 12
PUFF 22 QEMUNT 151 REI 540 ROCKY 11 ROJIN
542
RSX124 306 RSX145 304 RSX170 305 RSX184 307
RUTAN 255
SHARPE 260 SIDRAT 253 SIGGE 10 SPEEDY 24
TARDIS 250
TEMPO 9 THOROS 257 TINA 14 TIPSY 604
TONGUE 264
TOPSY 601 VALAR 400 VAROS 256 WXP 20 WXP2 23
YMER 609 ZEKE 5
Total nodes in area 1: 92
SETNOD>exit
Regarding the error, I have reproduced it with a single entry, viz:
!setnod
SETNOD>_set nod 2.298 name REACH_
SETNOD>_insert_
?SETNOD: Failed at node REACH (2.298), Item 0 of 1
SETNOD>
The high level code to do the entry is in JNTMAN. It loops through the
table passed to it via .NDINT, calling a lower level routine called
SCTAND in SCLINK. An error here is passed up to JNTMAN, but it is not
passed back to the user. There are some other problems in SCLINK
pertaining to negative return values, so some minor work is necessary
there, also.
I'll make some changes to these two modules, generate a new monitor for
VENTI2 and see what happens in a few days.
Right now, if any Tops-20 using is using SETNOD to update DECnet tables,
this appears to fail. If anybody else is seeing it or can reproduce it,
I'd like to hear about it.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On 5/4/21 11:15 AM, Thomas DeBellis wrote:
>
> Has anybody ever seen SETNOD fail to insert the entire node list? I
> just did.
>
> Shortly after I put my 20's up on HECnet, I wrote a reoccurring batch
> job that fires once a week on Sundays to pull the latest node list
> (T20.FIX) from MIM::. I use the highly venerable FILCOM program to do
> a difference of it with the previous week's list. I don't do anything
> in particular with the output except save it in case I feel like
> looking at it for some reason.
>
> The batch job always inserts the entire list, rewriting whatever might
> be in the monitor's data base. I have always been unsatisfied with
> doing things that way because it seemed to me to be inefficient as the
> node list grew. The HECnet node list count was 716 on 9-Jun-19 and
> it's now up to 884 as of the latest version that I've pulled,
> 30-Apr-21. The other problem is the microscopic possibility that a
> node is in Tops-20's monitor database (a hash table) that isn't in the
> HECnet node list.
>
> Nodes can get removed, although I think that infrequent. Nodes could
> get inserted outside of the batch job, but I think that most unlikely
> in my situation. Nodes can get renamed, as evidenced by 2.299 below,
> which went from THEPIT to THEARK. None of this should or has broken
> anything.
>
> However, it's been in the back of my mind to do two enhancements, one
> to Tops-20 and one to SETNOD. The NODE% JSYS should have an additional
> feature to return the current monitor data base. The SETNOD program
> should be enhanced to take that to compute the set difference with the
> new list. This would show additions, renames and deletions. That
> would bring the update operation down from some hundred items to less
> than ten, on average. This would obviously make more of a difference
> on huge DECnet's in the tens of thousands of nodes. Another NODE%
> feature should probably be to whack the entire monitor database except
> for the local node, which would be useful for trouble shooting.
>
> Last Sunday, the batch job failed with the following error:
>
> 18:33:40 USER SETNOD>*TAKE SYSTEM:NODE-DATA.TXT.0
> 18:33:40 USER
> 18:33:40 USER [Fork SETNOD opening <SYSTEM>NODE-DATA.TXT.1 for reading]
> 18:33:41 USER SETNOD>*SAVE
> 18:33:41 USER
> 18:33:41 USER [Fork SETNOD opening <SYSTEM>NODE-DATA.BIN.74 for
> reading, writing]
> 18:33:41 USER SETNOD>*INSERT
> 18:33:41 USER
> 18:33:41 USER *?SETNOD: Failed at node REACH*
> 18:33:41 USER SETNOD>
>
> I had a look at the SETNOD source and the HECnet node list and have
> discovered and concluded a few things. First, there doesn't seem to
> be anything syntactically wrong with REACH::'s definition: "set nod
> 2.298 name REACH". Second, there don't appear to be any semantic
> issues. 2.298 wasn't in use and it shouldn't matter if it was.
>
> In the case of INSERT, there are two kinds of errors from NODE%, a
> general failure of the JSYS and an incomplete insertion. The error
> is from the second case. Unfortunately, SETNOD isn't reporting enough
> information about the error, so I have to make some changes there.
> It's also possible that SETNOD is building an inconsistent database
> for the monitor to swallow; at least the LIST command is giving me
> some odd results, viz:
>
> SETNOD>list arEA 2
>
> [AREA 2]
> A2RTR
>
> TOTAL NODES FOUND: 1
>
> SETNOD>
>
> That's clearly wrong, viz:
>
> !i dec
> Local DECNET node: VENTI2. Nodes reachable: 7.
> Accessible DECNET nodes are: A2RTR BOINGO LEGATO
> TOMMYT VENTI2 VENTI ZITI
>
> The Exec output should probably be changed to say, "Nodes reachable in
> local area" and "Online nodes in area are:"
>
> Anybody have any ideas? Hunches? Clues?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> File 1) OLDF:[4,120] created: 1241 15-Apr-21
> File 2) NEWF:[1,1] created: 0102 30-Apr-21
>
> 1)1 set nod 44.9 name OSMIUM
> ****
> 2)1 set nod 2.292 name OSIRIS
> 2) set nod 44.9 name OSMIUM
> **************
> 1)1 set nod 13.3 name RED
> ****
> 2)1 *set nod 2.298 name REACH *
> 2) set nod 13.3 name RED
> **************
> 1)1 set nod 2.298 name RSX11M
> 1) set nod 1.306 name RSX124
> ****
> 2)1 set nod 1.306 name RSX124
> **************
> 1)1 set nod 42.5 name SPARKY
> ****
> 2)1 set nod 2.291 name SPARK
> 2) set nod 42.5 name SPARKY
> **************
> 1)1 set nod 2.299 name THEPIT
> 1) set nod 35.70 name THOMAS
> ****
> 2)1 set nod 2.299 name THEARK
> 2) set nod 35.70 name THOMAS
> **************
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sonic.net/pipermail/hecnet-list/attachments/20210504/c4db3cd1/attachment.htm>
More information about the Hecnet-list
mailing list