Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

sfmping/sfmayt details

2 posts in General Discussion Last posting was on 2007-07-27 00:04:14.0Z
Terry Moore Posted on 2007-07-26 22:27:59.0Z
From: "Terry Moore" <tmoore@lpch.org>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.impact
Subject: sfmping/sfmayt details
Lines: 14
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.11.191.1
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.11.191.1
Message-ID: <46a91fef$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Jul 2007 15:27:59 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1185488879 209.11.191.1 (26 Jul 2007 15:27:59 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Jul 2007 15:27:59 -0700, 209.11.191.1
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.impact:2083
Article PK: 230165

I'd like an acquisition AIM to be able to ascertain whether its SFM is
reasonably healthy before starting to listen on its TCP port, so the
likelihood of receiving a message it can't forward to the SFM is reduced.
There isn't an obvious way to do this in the Impact manuals, but DFCs
"sfmping" and "sfmayt" are listed to let an SFM assess another SFM's
availability. Can these be used from an AIM? Are there any undesirable
side-effects? What arguments should the AIM provide in the call? How
should it interpret the function's return value?

- Terry Moore
650-736-4089
tmoore@lpch.org


Terry Moore Posted on 2007-07-27 00:04:14.0Z
From: "Terry Moore" <tmoore@lpch.org>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.impact
References: <46a91fef$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: sfmping/sfmayt details
Lines: 21
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.11.191.1
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.11.191.1
Message-ID: <46a9367e@forums-1-dub>
Date: 26 Jul 2007 17:04:14 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1185494654 209.11.191.1 (26 Jul 2007 17:04:14 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 26 Jul 2007 17:04:14 -0700, 209.11.191.1
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.impact:2084
Article PK: 230166

I came up with an alternate solution: The AIM waits to receive a ping from
the SFM before starting to listen.

"Terry Moore" <tmoore@lpch.org> wrote in message
news:46a91fef$1@forums-1-dub...
> I'd like an acquisition AIM to be able to ascertain whether its SFM is
> reasonably healthy before starting to listen on its TCP port, so the
> likelihood of receiving a message it can't forward to the SFM is reduced.
> There isn't an obvious way to do this in the Impact manuals, but DFCs
> "sfmping" and "sfmayt" are listed to let an SFM assess another SFM's
> availability. Can these be used from an AIM? Are there any undesirable
> side-effects? What arguments should the AIM provide in the call? How
> should it interpret the function's return value?
>
> - Terry Moore
> 650-736-4089
> tmoore@lpch.org
>
>