[Info-vax] HP Integrity rx2800 i4 (2.53GHz/32.0MB) :: PAKs won't load

[VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG]

In article <qb2apc-b3n1.ln1 at news.chingola.ch>, Paul Sture <nospam at sture.ch> writes:
>On 2016-02-15, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG <VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>> In article <cvu9pc-2um1.ln1 at news.chingola.ch>, Paul Sture <nospam at sture.ch> writes:
>>>On 2016-02-15, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG <VAXman- at SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'm working with a customer who has 2 HP Integrity rx2800 i4 (2.53GHz/32.0MB)
>>>> (from $ SHOW CPU output).  Each has a separate system disk because they will 
>>>> be clustered at disparate sites.  The PAKs on one of the nodes load but they
>>>> do not load on the other.  I've checked that each node has different/unique 
>>>> PAKs by authorization numbers.  Listed below:
>>>>
>>>
>>>....
>>>
>>>> On NODE_2, a $ LICENSE LOAD returns:
>>>>
>>>> %LICENSE-W-NOLOAD, license was not loaded for OPENVMS-I64-BOE
>>>> -LICENSE-F-EXCEEDED, attempted usage exceeds active license limits
>>>> %LICENSE-W-NOLOAD, license was not loaded for VMSCLUSTER
>>>> -LICENSE-F-EXCEEDED, attempted usage exceeds active license limits
>>>> %LICENSE-W-NOLOAD, license was not loaded for VOLSHAD
>>>> -LICENSE-F-EXCEEDED, attempted usage exceeds active license limits
>>>>
>>>> WTF?
>>>
>>>$ LICENSE MODIFY /INCLUDE=(node-name[,node-name,...])
>>>
>>>is your friend.
>>>
>>>From HELP LICENSE /MODIFY /INCLUDE
>>>
>>>   Licenses for the OpenVMS operating system usually specify the
>>>   NO_SHARE option on their PAKs. In a cluster environment you must
>>>   restrict each of these OpenVMS licenses to a single node. If
>>>   you did not do this when registering with VMSLICENSE.COM, enter
>>>   LICENSE MODIFY/INCLUDE=node-name, specifying one SCS node name
>>>   for each OpenVMS license.
>>>
>> It's NOT a NO_SHARE issue and the two nodes have -- I'm pretty sure I stated
>> it in the initial post -- their OWN separate system disks.  The two systems
>> are perfect clones of each other save for unique PAKs on each, SCSSYSTEM_ID,
>> and DECnet and TCP/IP addresses.
>>
>
>The clue is in
>LICENSE-F-EXCEEDED, attempted usage exceeds active license limits
>
>What is happening is that NODE_2 is trying to load license units already
>loaded by NODE_1.
>
>If it's not a  NO_SHARE issue, then (despite what the HELP says)
>insufficient license units on any given node will trigger
>LICENSE-F-EXCEEDED.  And yes, I have witnessed this problem on systems
>with their own system disks.
>
>You really need to nail down each license to the system it belongs to,
>and that can be accomplished with /INCLUDE.
>
>Please give it a try.
>

Not in this case.

There's an issue with -1h1 and certain licenses.

-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.