HP3000-L Archives

December 2001, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:21:44 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
X-no-Archive:yes
Normally, yes, I would very much expect that a truly failed ftp get would
never "save" the file into the permanent domain. I hope that those who
understand the particulars of MPE's file system and ftp could at least give
an authoritative answer, if not an explanation. I * think * that the file
would stay in the temporary domain, and go away with the job. That you even
have a file at all seems to indicate that ftp determined that it had all
337,093,471 bytes, and was done, so it saved the file in the permanent
domain. And until that time, no one else should have been able to see it by
normal means. It looks like the command line buildparms are allowing
893,000,000 bytes, more than enough. Does your LISTFILE ,3 show NUM REC:
377484? If so, I bet you have your file (although there's a candidate for
compression), and if not, then you almost certainly do not. Still, I would
want to compare the content of your last record with their last record.

If ftp saved the file, then what happened? Well, I notice that if a file of
this size normally takes two hours to get, you're getting about 45
Kbytes/sec. That's a bit slow. Unless it's via dialup, in which case it's
actually not such bad throughput, although dialup is Russian Roulette, but
with a random number of bullets. But for a network connection, that's slow,
and that makes me wonder what else is going on, on this network? So, I would
guess that one side or the other had trouble closing the connection. When
does the other side say the connection was closed?

I assume that, had anything changed about the time this started failing, you
would have mentioned this. But it's probably worth a triple check with the
other company. ANY change, at any point between their server and your 3000,
should be on the table. My favorite usual suspect is the firewall, although
that's probably not fair to good firewall admins with broad budgetary
discretion (so let me apologize to both of you now, since it's a good idea
to be polite to anyone with broad budgetary discretion).

For the particulars, I would call HPRC. And their first question will be, do
you have the latest patches for your OS?

Greg Stigers
http://www.cgiusa.com
Share and Enjoy - [log in to unmask]

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2