Solved: IPM Reports

turfsniffer0 · ‎08-02-2010

I'm having numerous problems with IPM. Most have been resolved but the major issue is getting the reporting to work correctly.

I've got 8 HTTP operations (A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H) that all point to the same target but access different files of various sizes. I select 42 routers and create 8 collectors for each router pointing to the 8 HTTP operations.

I verified that each of the routers are configured successfully, and IPM will chart the latency on the Montior graphs so I know that IPM and the router are talking ok. However when i attempt to create an hourly report it will only show data for Collector A for each router. All other collectors do not show, even though they display stats in the real time monitor chart. The thresholds are also exactly the same.

I've tried various ways to get it to work but it looks like the IPM database isn't recording the data for the other collectors.

This morning I deleted all collectors and created just two A and B - both set exactly the same except for the files that they point to in the same webserver. A is fine and B appears to be fine but its the same behaviour - when i try and pull a report for both, A responds, B doesn't.

IPM log shows:

[ Mon Aug 02 11:19:07 BST 2010 ],ERROR,[STL-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.SnmpDeviceAccess,setVarbindListForSet,1792,Variable mapping failed for:30com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.DALVariableNotSupportedException

[ Mon Aug 02 13:19:16 BST 2010 ],ERROR,[Poller-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.ProcessResponseUtil,ProcessObjectIfs,233,The value, 6685200 for 111 is not valid

IPM Process log shows a similar error:

[ Mon Aug 02 11:19:07 BST 2010 ],INFO ,[STL-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.SnmpDeviceAccess,configureInDevice,836,configuring Table name rttMonReactTable
[ Mon Aug 02 11:19:07 BST 2010 ],INFO ,[STL-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.SnmpDeviceAccess,configureInDevice,836,configuring Table name oldRttReactConfig
[ Mon Aug 02 12:19:16 BST 2010 ],ERROR,[Poller-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.ProcessResponseUtil,ProcessObjectIfs,233,The value, 6685200 for 111 is not valid
[ Mon Aug 02 13:19:16 BST 2010 ],ERROR,[Poller-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.ProcessResponseUtil,ProcessObjectIfs,233,The value, 6685200 for 111 is not valid
[ Mon Aug 02 14:19:16 BST 2010 ],ERROR,[Poller-test_10.5.245.21_STM-B],com.cisco.nm.ipmng.dal.ProcessResponseUtil,ProcessObjectIfs,233,The value, 6685200 for 111 is not valid

Any help would be welcome! I don't seem to have the option to manually stop/start the IPM database via command line, although i have tried restarting the services in MSC window. Does any know what these entries in the log mean? I'm thinking that the issue is with the IPM database but i've no way of verifying this further without help.

Thanks

Steven

Joe Clarke · ‎08-04-2010

An upgrade is not needed. You can just install LMS 3.2 from scratch, then install the LMS 3.x license into it. If you need to migrate data, just restore your LMS 3.1 backup to 3.2, and it will migrate the data for you.

That said, LMS 3.2 doesn't need 8 GB of RAM necessarilly. It all depends on the number of devices you're going to manage, and the applications you're going to install. With 6 GB of RAM you can manage up to 1.5K devices will all applications.

View solution in original post

Joe Clarke · ‎08-02-2010

This is a bug in IPM 4.1. I couldn't find a bug ID, but it is fixed in IPM 4.2. Essentially, the upper bound for the value was too small in the IPM code. This has since been fixed. If you upgrade to LMS 3.2, this will go away. You can download LMS 3.2 from http://www.cisco.com/go/lms . The download will say it's a 90-day eval, but since you have an LMS 3.x license, you will actually get a fully licensed copy of 3.2 when you install it.

turfsniffer0 · ‎08-03-2010

I tried the link but there's no option for LMS3.2 for Windows - only Solaris. I've also tried searching the cisco website but come across the same issue - only Solaris tar files available.

Do you think there might be a patch available for this bug?

cheers

Steven

Joe Clarke · ‎08-03-2010

Here's the direct link for the Windows download:

https://cisco.mediuscorp.com/market/networkers/productView.se.work?/nxt/rcrs/proieidentity/=17651

No, there is no patch for LMS 3.1.

turfsniffer0 · ‎08-03-2010

Thanks Joseph, I thought I was going crazy! I'm, downloading the file now but won't be able to install it until tomorrow. Hopefully that'll sort the issue - either way, I'll update tomorrow. Thanks again!!!

turfsniffer0 · ‎08-04-2010

Hi Joseph,

have encountered more problems after upgrading. The server was 32-bit and had 6gb of memory (server 2003 ent). Looks like LMS 3.2 needs at least 8gb of physical memory. So I was planning on doing this:

install 32-bit LMS 3.0 on a 64-bit platform

after install, upgrade LMS to 3.01 (64-bit)

upgrade LMS to 3.2

I don't know if I need to install the 3.01, but this was to ensure that the ciscoworks bundle was operating on 64-bit, because I assume that 32-bit application running on a 64-bit operating system isn't going to make much difference to the poor performance I'm seeing with LMS 3.2 on 32-bit windows.

Does this sound ok?

Cheers

Steven

Joe Clarke · ‎08-04-2010

An upgrade is not needed. You can just install LMS 3.2 from scratch, then install the LMS 3.x license into it. If you need to migrate data, just restore your LMS 3.1 backup to 3.2, and it will migrate the data for you.

That said, LMS 3.2 doesn't need 8 GB of RAM necessarilly. It all depends on the number of devices you're going to manage, and the applications you're going to install. With 6 GB of RAM you can manage up to 1.5K devices will all applications.

turfsniffer0 · ‎08-05-2010

Even better! I'll install 3.2 clean on 64 bit version. At the moment we manage 1300 devices - the current installation is on a 32-bit windows platform and although 6gb of ram is there - windows is only using 4gb. So the current installation has the cpu flatlining at 100%. Its a virtual server as well, so it's no big deal to upgrade the hardware. There's also the small benefit of learning the ins and outs of LMS

Anyways, the original problem I had, appears to have been resolved with the 3.2 upgrade. So I guess that my original issue is now resolved. If I have any further issues with 3.2 installation i'll create a new post.

Joseph, thank you for your help. Cisco have a goodin