This post is more than 5 years old
385 Posts
0
1250
MSC and SRDF/A RDG groups - maintenance
We are dabbling with MSC in our SRDF/A environment while doing a frame migration. One of the quirks with using MSC is that you need to disable consistency whenever you want to individually manipulate an individual dynamic RDF group to do something such as add or remove device.
When you disable consistency at the MSC level I understand that across the groups there is no longer consistency. But what about at the RDF level?
If you do the following commands:
symcg -cg cggroup disable
symrdg -g dggroup query -rdf
You'll see that "Consistency" is disabled at the RDG level, BUT the state of the SRDF/A relationship is "Consistent"
So my question is - are you really "Consistent" or do you need to run enable at each RDF/group level while Consistency is down?
Anyone have any insight into this?
When you disable consistency at the MSC level I understand that across the groups there is no longer consistency. But what about at the RDF level?
If you do the following commands:
symcg -cg cggroup disable
symrdg -g dggroup query -rdf
You'll see that "Consistency" is disabled at the RDG level, BUT the state of the SRDF/A relationship is "Consistent"
So my question is - are you really "Consistent" or do you need to run enable at each RDF/group level while Consistency is down?
Anyone have any insight into this?
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 7th, 2008 17:00
do you need to run enable at each RDF/group level
while Consistency is down?
I was forgetting to answer this part of your question.
First of all let me explain some details of your complex question.
1) MSG will drop ALL RDFG in case of any issues with any RDFG or device.
2) the "consistent" state means that the R2 side received and applied a whole cycle.
3) by default a RDFG without any form of "consistency" will tolerate issues with a single device without dropping the whole session.
The main point is obviously point number 3. If you have MSC and disable it, you have a weak spot since should something hit a single device in any RDFG, you may have a single device that is "not that consistent" while the rest of the devices are still "consistent" (look at point number 2).
This behaviour comes from "tolerance", a feature that is enabled by default when you enable SRDF/A on a RDFG. Since it was too easy to understand, the code will enable tolerance by default but this may vanish your consistency. So you have to disable tolerance (thus enabling consistency) if you need. And you usually need it
So the easy answer to your question is YES. If you want to be 100% sure that your R2 is really consistent, you need to enable consistency on any RDFG operating in SRDF/A mode while you disable MSC.
Enabling consistency on SRDF/A RDFGs will drop the whole RDFG (and only this RDFG) should something happen to the link itself or to any device pair in the RDFG.
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 7th, 2008 15:00
Disabling MSC will disable this specific behaviour.
When you disable MSC every single RDFG will behave "on his own". Should a group have problems, this group will drop but all other RDFG will keep on updating R2 devices in a "consistent" way (i.e. in 30 second cycles as usual).
Hope it shades some light on your questions
bodnarg
385 Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 04:00
What threw me is running the disable and still seeing things in a consistent state - but it makes sense that they'll remain consistent unless something forces a device or devices to go inconsistent.
Switching from a single RDF groups per frame to multiple RDF groups on a large DMX-4 is causing us to rethink/reconsider things that we just took for granted before.
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 05:00
And sometime you'll have Dynamox answer your questions .. I know it's ugly ... but even Dynamox may be usefull sometimes
RRR
5.7K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 05:00
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 05:00
RRR
5.7K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 05:00
On one of my USA trips I had to make a stop in Atlanta and all I can remember is that there was nothing out there. From the airplane at 10km high in the sky, there was simply nothing and the plane suddenly started descending ! I thought: what's going on: this is the middle of nowhere ! And suddenly Atlanta became visible. A city with nothing around it. Soooo unlike any city in Europe !
And then we landed. Seen from the ground it sure looks normal, but from the sky it sure looks like a desolated place. Something like: hey, we still have some space available here, let's put a city there.
RRR
5.7K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 05:00
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 05:00
RRR
5.7K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 06:00
But I remember the airport very well. It's the one from that commercial where you're underneath a dome and when looking up a airplane (or was it a whole fleet) flies exactly over that dome.
I had to stay there to wait for my next plane for 7 hours ...
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 8th, 2008 06:00
dynamox
1 Rookie
1 Rookie
•
20.4K Posts
0
May 9th, 2008 22:00
xe2sdc
2.8K Posts
0
May 10th, 2008 12:00
Are you going to share pictures with us, aren't you ??
RRR
5.7K Posts
0
May 13th, 2008 00:00