| Author |
Message
|
| zpat |
 Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:04 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
IBM keep changing their minds on how JMS works with MQ in respect of data conversion and also authentication.
I think they have now decided that the traditional IBM approach of never changing existing default behaviour (unless selected by an setting) - really is the right approach.
Unfortunately all these changes have led to a situation whereby WMQ 6 is different to WMQ 7 is different to later fixpacks on WMQ 7.
Each of these changes has the potential to break applications, depending when they were first tested and what behaviour they rely on.
Fixpack 7.0.1.7 has a change to do with handling of blank connection ids - which could cause us problems.
These APARs are not always highlighted by IBM - they should really highlight in massive fonts - all changes to behaviours, as opposed to bug fixes. I think a little white paper outlining these changes and the timeline in terms of versions and fixpacks would help customers avoid the bear traps |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mvic |
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 2080
|
| zpat wrote: |
| Fixpack 7.0.1.7 has a change to do with handling of blank connection ids - which could cause us problems. |
What was that change? I searched the web page that lists fixes and did not find anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
IV02827
https://www-304.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1IV02827
IBM are reverting to the previous behaviour (which I personally don't want) and allowing blank ids to be passed through to the QM, instead of (sensibly) being overidden by the JVM id.
However I was arguing just now for consistency, so I can understand why they are putting it back the way it was - but I just hate to think which apps of ours will now fail - because most JMS developers don't pass an auth id properly (or fail to set WAS up properly).
It can be re-enabled by a JVM property.
Last edited by zpat on Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rconn2 |
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 79
Location: MD, USA
|
fjb_saper - they're using the resource adapter. It's WAS version 7, but I forget the minor version. The conversion error appeared when we upgraded from MQ 6 to 7.0.1.6. I had thought 7.0.1.5 had fixed this issue. And, it has for a stand-alone JMS application which uses the 7.0.1.6 jars.
When I get a message using the JMS app with a client tcp connection, no problem. Get the same from a remote WAS and unable to convert.
In production, we've had to downgrade to MQ 6. And, if not quickly fixed, we'll have to do the same for dev & pre-prod.
A fix was recommended earlier in this thread: "The error might mean that you do not have the AIX fileset bos.iconv.ucs.ebcdic installed".
For the JMS app using the 7.0.1.6 jars, the above fix is moot since it works. But, might this be a fix for the conversion error using the WAS 7 client?
Or, is there a WAS fix pack that corresponds to MQ FP 7.0.1.6? I'm not a WAS admin, but if such exists, I can report this and they can follow-up.
Thanks again for any guidance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rconn2 |
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 79
Location: MD, USA
|
| zpat - I agree. There are too many inconsistencies between client and server combinations and versions and fix packs. As in our case, a v 7 fix pack fixes one v 7 client and breaks another v 7 (WAS) client. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| rconn2 wrote: |
Or, is there a WAS fix pack that corresponds to MQ FP 7.0.1.6? I'm not a WAS admin, but if such exists, I can report this and they can follow-up.
Thanks again for any guidance. |
Have your WAS admin chase it down. I'm sure there is a fix pack or APAR in WAS that will fix it.
Have fun 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rconn2 |
| Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 79
Location: MD, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
The transcript in that link - is really quite a tale of woe for customers.
I dread upgrading MQ v6 clients now, because most of our apps are JMS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| zpat wrote: |
The transcript in that link - is really quite a tale of woe for customers.
I dread upgrading MQ v6 clients now, because most of our apps are JMS. |
The end result of that APAR is to make it easy to maintain expected behavior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
