| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| Very poor performance on connect to MQ v7 |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| trystan2k |
 Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 22
|
| trystan2k wrote: |
| ramires wrote: |
why don't you try as recommended in the documentation (Infocenter) ?
| Code: |
"The minimum configuration for WebSphere MQ for these resources is as follows:
kernel.msgmni = 1024
kernel.shmmni = 4096
kernel.shmall = 2097152
kernel.shmmax = 268435456
kernel.sem = 500 256000 250 1024
fs.file-max = 524288"
|
|
I will try to increase the file-max, as I think this is the only one that is less then min, and could have something to do. All others are higher than the min which I guess give more 'power' to the environment...
Thanks |
Nope... No success changing that too (I also have increase shmall in PROD box and got still same thing...)
I don´t know more where to look...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| vmcgloin |
| Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 04 Apr 2002
Posts: 560
Location: Scotland
|
| I am not sure if you have been side-tracked or are looking into a different problem now? If not, did you ever get to the bottom of comparing the MQ configuration. If you are not the person that defined & configured these queue managers can you speak to the person that did? I assume you have, but might there be some extra configuration on the secondary(?) qmgrs to record when they are used for example? Are all non-MQ performance benchmarks on the servers the same? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trystan2k |
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 22
|
| vmcgloin wrote: |
| I am not sure if you have been side-tracked or are looking into a different problem now? If not, did you ever get to the bottom of comparing the MQ configuration. If you are not the person that defined & configured these queue managers can you speak to the person that did? I assume you have, but might there be some extra configuration on the secondary(?) qmgrs to record when they are used for example? Are all non-MQ performance benchmarks on the servers the same? |
Hi,
It is not me that installed and defined the settings for queue manager, but already asked the responsable more than one time to compare the configuration and all times he said that everything is the same. I even tried to check some settings with MQ explorer, and they really seems to be equal.
We have some other processes running in one of our prod machines, that also has MQ performance issues, and the performance is normal. But I will try to prepare a small code to do some tests with network to check, you give me a good idea...
I have asked MQ team now to install 3 different QMs in 3 different machines, one MQ v6, one MQ v7.1 and one MQ v7.5 and I will test their performance. Those are another prod box that are not live yet, so no traffic at all on them... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| terencey |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 18 Feb 2013
Posts: 2
|
Hi:
Just wondering if you have any inroads to this performance issue as my system also faced a similar slow performance for JMS clients when migrating from MQ 6 to MQ 7.0.1.9?
Do note that MQ7 removed the Connection Pooling feature in MQ7 client, which we needed to replace with a separate implementation for applications outside JEE containers.
| trystan2k wrote: |
| vmcgloin wrote: |
| I am not sure if you have been side-tracked or are looking into a different problem now? If not, did you ever get to the bottom of comparing the MQ configuration. If you are not the person that defined & configured these queue managers can you speak to the person that did? I assume you have, but might there be some extra configuration on the secondary(?) qmgrs to record when they are used for example? Are all non-MQ performance benchmarks on the servers the same? |
Hi,
It is not me that installed and defined the settings for queue manager, but already asked the responsable more than one time to compare the configuration and all times he said that everything is the same. I even tried to check some settings with MQ explorer, and they really seems to be equal.
We have some other processes running in one of our prod machines, that also has MQ performance issues, and the performance is normal. But I will try to prepare a small code to do some tests with network to check, you give me a good idea...
I have asked MQ team now to install 3 different QMs in 3 different machines, one MQ v6, one MQ v7.1 and one MQ v7.5 and I will test their performance. Those are another prod box that are not live yet, so no traffic at all on them... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| terencey |
| Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 18 Feb 2013
Posts: 2
|
Btw, i am running in the following envt:
OS: Solaris 10
MQ Server: 7.0.1.9
MQ Client: 7.0.1.9
App Server: WebLogic 10.0.2
POJO: JVM 1.5.0_21 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trystan2k |
| Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Posts: 22
|
Hi,
I was able to fix my issue with the performance. In fact, it was not fault of MQ at all. We have it installed in a Red Hat box, and in a disk with GFS2 file system (a file system fro Red Hat) and that was the root cause. After we move the installation to the ext3 file system, the performance got better, even better than the one we had with MQ v6.
| terencey wrote: |
Hi:
Just wondering if you have any inroads to this performance issue as my system also faced a similar slow performance for JMS clients when migrating from MQ 6 to MQ 7.0.1.9?
Do note that MQ7 removed the Connection Pooling feature in MQ7 client, which we needed to replace with a separate implementation for applications outside JEE containers.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| trystan2k wrote: |
| We have it installed in a Red Hat box, and in a disk with GFS2 file system (a file system fro Red Hat) and that was the root cause. After we move the installation to the ext3 file system, the performance got better, even better than the one we had with MQ v6. |
interesting observation, did you move the queuemanager and log files to the ext3 or recreate the queuemanager on the new file system?
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
