| Author |
Message
|
| Michael Dag |
 Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 4:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| I would strongly hope that if a runmqsc DISPLAY command (or a PCF INQUIRE command) produced output for a field that was not produced in the output of dmpmqcfg, then the support team would accept the fact that it is a defect in dmpmqcfg, and that any documentation failures on the part of dmpmqcfg are in fact Documentation APARs as well. |
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jcv |
| Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 411
Location: Zagreb
|
Michael, I don't think you actually missed anything, that's exactly what I meant. dmpmqcfg behaves just the way it is documented - suboptimally. I deal with it by not using it, while it still represents the bleeding edge of technology. You maybe missed only the reason why I posted my findings here, to get confirmation that other people experienced it too, and that it was not already reported. And will you please accept my linked in invitation sent to you several months ago via H.Beal. I'm in the process of connecting with prominent figures of MQ community. I don't know exactly what am I gonna use it for, but who knows, everyone connects these days, so why stay disconnected.
Jeff, I didn't use the word pedantic with pejorative sense and negative connotations in mind. Actually, if you like, you can briefly define ESR as well, with accent on how it actually differs from PMR, just for completness sake. So, when I tried to search for APARs by using dmpmqcfg as keyword, from the same web application that I (unfrequently) use to submit PMR's, I went to the form which prompts for Service Requests search. I was confused when I actually should have used the search facility in the upper right corner for that purpose, the one that is labeled only with the magnifying glass icon on the right. I realized that later on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| jcv wrote: |
| Michael, I don't think you actually missed anything, that's exactly what I meant. dmpmqcfg behaves just the way it is documented - suboptimally. |
OK
| jcv wrote: |
| I deal with it by not using it, while it still represents the bleeding edge of technology.. |
so what do you use today to save your config reliably? I know what I use 
| jcv wrote: |
| You maybe missed only the reason why I posted my findings here, to get confirmation that other people experienced it too, and that it was not already reported. And will you please accept my linked in invitation sent to you several months ago via H.Beal. I'm in the process of connecting with prominent figures of MQ community. I don't know exactly what am I gonna use it for, but who knows, everyone connects these days, so why stay disconnected. |
please connect again directly (say you know me or done business with me  ) can't find any old invites and can't resolve your name jcv on linkedin...
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jcv |
| Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 411
Location: Zagreb
|
| OK, thanks. I still use MS03, dmpmqcfg for chlauth's, considering switching to dmpmqcfg only. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| jcv wrote: |
| OK, thanks. I still use MS03, dmpmqcfg for chlauth's, considering switching to dmpmqcfg only. |
Obviously I use MQDocument which handles anything nicely (and if it doesn't I fix it!) 
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
So, I wanted to compare:
amqoamd -s
to what:
dmpmqcfg -o 1line x authrec
would produce.
I was surprised that dmpmqcfg gave me a result for every object that matched and so I had many duplicate lines! Not even close to what amqoamd does.
This is on AIX 6.1 WMQ 7.5.0.2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
From the MQ List Serve. Since you can find this MQ List Serve thread easily via Google, I assume its no problem to quote Ralph here so this community knows there is progress on this issue.
| Quote: |
All,
T.Rob has had a chat with me about this topic and so I would like to bring a little clarify here.
This is not working as designed.
This is a defect.
Once I have an APAR number I will update the list server so that you will know which fixpack it will be resolved in.
As promised the APAR that you need to watch for is IT00612.
My intention is that we will deliver the "2 line" output and that AUTHRECs support that is missing on MQ 7.5
I will update further once it is available. I'm also very interested if there is anyone that wants to give it a "test drive" before we make it available in a fixpack.
Any takers?
Ralph Bateman |
I'm not going to posts Ralph's email to give the bots another place to grab his email. If you want to beta test the new dmpmqcfg you can find his email by Googling for the the MQ List Serve thread titled "Re: dmpmqcfg missing AUTHREC?"
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hughson |
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 09 May 2013
Posts: 1959
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| I wish we had more insight into why IBM created AUTHREC. After 10 years of using setmqaut I'm familiar with that syntax so I'd like a good reason to switch. |
Hi Peter,
Only just spotted this. I know this thread has moved onto other details, but I thought this was worth a response none-the-less.
We created SET AUTHREC so that you can make a single script for both definitions and authorities. It is no coincidence that this happened at the same time as we created dmpmqcfg.
It is not considered a replacement for setmqaut, but simply an alternate 'spelling'. Too many scripts using setmqaut exist for us to consider removing it.
You should choose to use it where is makes sense for you. I would echo comments that suggest new queue managers or new projects might start with the single script whereas existing projects or queue managers don't need to be converted.
Cheers
Morag
_________________
Morag Hughson @MoragHughson
IBM MQ Technical Education Specialist
Get your IBM MQ training here!
MQGem Software |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| hughson wrote: |
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| I wish we had more insight into why IBM created AUTHREC. After 10 years of using setmqaut I'm familiar with that syntax so I'd like a good reason to switch. |
Hi Peter,
Only just spotted this. I know this thread has moved onto other details, but I thought this was worth a response none-the-less.
We created SET AUTHREC so that you can make a single script for both definitions and authorities. It is no coincidence that this happened at the same time as we created dmpmqcfg.
It is not considered a replacement for setmqaut, but simply an alternate 'spelling'. Too many scripts using setmqaut exist for us to consider removing it.
You should choose to use it where is makes sense for you. I would echo comments that suggest new queue managers or new projects might start with the single script whereas existing projects or queue managers don't need to be converted.
Cheers
Morag |
Not too fast .... as long as amqoamd -s and dmqmqcfg do not export all my security settings, I keep the latest version of my setmqaut script around... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Really pleased at the tweaking of 1line and the addition of 2line.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jcv |
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chevalier
Joined: 07 May 2007
Posts: 411
Location: Zagreb
|
| Perhaps they could have implemented optional checking when defining an authority profile for Q.NOT.YET.DEFINED, or for Q.THAT.WILL.NEVER.BE.DEFINED.ON.THE.LOCAL.QMGR, and display a warning if qmgr cannot resolve such a queue in any cluster that it participates in, and of course if it cannot find it locally, when they dropped that control two versions ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hughson |
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2014 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 09 May 2013
Posts: 1959
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
|
| jcv wrote: |
| Perhaps they could have implemented..... |
May I suggest that you raise an RFE for your wish?
Cheers
Morag
_________________
Morag Hughson @MoragHughson
IBM MQ Technical Education Specialist
Get your IBM MQ training here!
MQGem Software |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
