dsh and rah - Aix

This is a discussion on dsh and rah - Aix ; hi, i have a simple questions here: is there any reason why we need rah if we already have dsh? (except running commands in serial, but anything more significant)? also, which of the following works better? "dsh sudo ...." or ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: dsh and rah

  1. dsh and rah

    hi, i have a simple questions here: is there any reason why we need
    rah if we already have dsh? (except running commands in serial, but
    anything more significant)?

    also, which of the following works better? "dsh sudo ...." or
    "sudo dsh ..."?

    thanks

  2. Re: dsh and rah

    On Jul 7, 5:41*pm, "uwc...@gmail.com" wrote:
    > hi, i have a simple questions here: is there any reason why we need
    > rah if we already have dsh? *(except running commands in serial, but
    > anything more significant)?
    >
    > also, *which of the following works better? * "dsh sudo ...." * or
    > "sudo dsh ..."?
    >
    > thanks


    rah ?? u mean rsh ??

    dsh uses "rsh" or "ssh" under the covers .. it would wholly depend on
    how you dsh was setup .. if its setup using "rsh" then yes, you need
    it .. is you are using "ssh" then no.

    Rgds
    Mark Taylor

  3. Re: dsh and rah

    On Jul 7, 12:41*pm, "uwc...@gmail.com" wrote:
    > hi, i have a simple questions here: is there any reason why we need
    > rah if we already have dsh? *(except running commands in serial, but
    > anything more significant)?
    >
    > also, *which of the following works better? * "dsh sudo ...." * or
    > "sudo dsh ..."?
    >
    > thanks


    rah is a db2 supplied command. dsh is an OS supplied command. both do
    similar things.

    neither "works better".. they do slightly different things.. depends
    what you need.

+ Reply to Thread