| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| dspmqver showing the base install |
View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message
|
| PeterPotkay |
 Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:05 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
We tried this once. With 1000s of servers I can see the appeal. Consider this - you install MQ 6.0.2.6 on the gold copy. You manage to push it out to all the servers with your copy method. Things are working. Time to upgrade the servers to 6.0.2.7. So you upgrade the gold copy and start rolling out. Then you find some, but only some of the servers need to be 6.0.2.8. Others you find need to roll back to 6.0.2.6, for whatever reason. Now what?
You've discovered dspmqver doesn't work on one of them. Are you 100% sure everything and anything works on all the others?
Anyhoo, if you figure out what was wrong with #16 please let us know how you fixed it.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| edub1 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 28
|
Well, our issue in pushing back was "everything was done the same each time." Well, it turns out that this was not the case, as we suspected, and some of you pointed out as well. Sometimes the obvious seems to be the hardest thing to prove.
It turns out that a 3rd party doing this was following a different method each time. We ran into several other funky issues that brought this to light (one command working when the other wasn’t found, or missing files all together). Needless to say, this is being addressed.
Peter, this is defiantly a challenge for us. Thankfully, after the initial install, “one-offs” are a bit more acceptable for the majority of our locations as far as maintenance levels go. When doing an upgrade or applying a fix, we do utilize a silent install method, and update our gold box, because we are the only team installing.
I’ll be first to admit that our process isn’t ideal for our MQ team in all cases, but to put it simply, we our outnumbered by the people who this method is the best for using the same servers. For the most part, however, it has been a proven system for us for a number of years in our production environment. These Linux boxes are for something new and new people were doing them.
Bruce, all I can say is that if a company is willing to pay IBM, IBM is willing to support it. I'm sure there is a lot more to it than that, but with the exception of voicing my opinion about some things, I leave that stuff up to management and IBM sales folks.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 8:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
I'm sympathetic. As both a techie and (former) manager, I feel strongly that just because we can do something, doesn't mean that we should.
Installing a product, especially one as complex and pervasive to your business, should be done with a vendor-approved and supported procedure. IBM offers several - including silent install.
It is inevitable that your environment will change over time such that your funky ryo method will fail - again.
Best of luck.
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
