| Author |
Message
|
| bruce2359 |
 Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 6:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9470
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| rahuldhanpal wrote: |
| Yes all the custom client connection channels are defined at 100mb in the ccdt |
What is maxmsgl of the SVRCONN channel the app connects to?
_________________
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 |
|
 |
| rahuldhanpal |
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Kenosha WI
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rahuldhanpal |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Kenosha WI
|
we got a chance to enable trace last night to find detailed logging and I found the following instances from the trace.log on websphere side
[6/29/15 21:59:06:755 CDT] 00000310 WMQConnection > poisonous(MQMD,MQGMO,MQCBC) (com.ibm.msg.client.wmq.internal.WMQConnectionBrowserShadow) [:/6e346e34] Entry
version:2 report:0 msgType:1 expiry:-1 feedback:0 encoding:273 codedCharSetId:1208 format:'MQHRF2 ' priority:5 persistence:0 msgId:414D51204A4F45505244475720202020558D9B2C2C1115AE correlId:313037623733666633326430363963622D31623830376266 backoutCount:0 replyToQ:'JOE.TEMPQ.558D9B2C2B9205B4 ' replyToQMgr:'JOEPRDGW ' userIdentifier:'joeclient ' accountingToken:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 applIdentityData:' ' putApplType:28 putApplName:'JOE MQ Client ' putDate:'20150630' putTime:'02590625' applOriginData:' ' groupId:000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 msgSeqNumber:1 physicalMsgOffset:0 msgFlags:0 originalLength:-1
version:4 options:52453461 waitInterval:0 resolvedQName:'<null>' matchOptions:3 groupStatus:32 segmentStatus:32 msgToken:553C3611000000800000000001E985AD returnedLength:0 messageHandle:0
version:2 callType:7 hobj:[0x2 - com.ibm.mq.jmqi.remote.internal.system.RemoteHobj[objectType=1,objectName=JOE.CLIENT.QUEUE ,proxyQueue=com.ibm.mq.jmqi.remote.internal.system.RemoteProxyQueue@6ed56ed5]] compCode:1 reason:2079 state:0 dataLength:4201 bufferLength:0 flags:0 reconnectDelay:0
[6/29/15 21:59:06:755 CDT] 00000310 DUMMY 3 (DUMMY) [:/7f8e7f8e] DUMMY: getBackoutCount()
0
[6/29/15 21:59:06:755 CDT] 00000310 WMQConnection < poisonous(MQMD,MQGMO,MQCBC) (com.ibm.msg.client.wmq.internal.WMQConnectionBrowserShadow) [:/6e346e34] Exit
false
1
[6/29/15 21:59:06:756 CDT] 00000310 DUMMY 3 (DUMMY) [:/74ea74ea] DUMMY: getNativeCharSet()
819(ISO-8859-1)
[6/29/15 21:59:06:756 CDT] 00000310 DUMMY 3 (DUMMY) [:] unspecified method: DUMMY
MQGMO.getMsgToken(): [B@70e370e3
[6/29/15 21:59:06:756 CDT] 00000310 DUMMY 3 (DUMMY) [:] unspecified method: DUMMY
553c3611 00000080 00000000 01e985ad
[6/29/15 21:59:06:756 CDT] 00000310 DUMMY 3 (DUMMY) [:/71437143] DUMMY: getDataLength()
4201
[6/29/15 21:59:06:756 CDT] 00000310 WMQMessageRef > <init>(byte [ ],WMQDestination,String,String,String,int,byte [ ]) (com.ibm.msg.client.wmq.internal.WMQMessageReference) [:/414e414e] Entry
[B@70e370e3
com.ibm.msg.client.wmq.common.internal.WMQDestination@65f065f0
<null>
<null>
<null>
4201
<null>
what interests me is the CCSID and the poisonous property and the reasoncode:2079 .. any ideas guys ?
THanks
RD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| That appears to be reading the message, not sending it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 5:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9470
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| That appears to be reading the message, not sending it. |
A different problem - not message too big for queue.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Just to ease my mind... You are using JMS right?
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rahuldhanpal |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Kenosha WI
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| Just to ease my mind... You are using JMS right? |
Yes.
Sorry, the earlier trace which i sent across is the wrong timestamp.
And going back to basics ..Do i have to refresh cluster or restart channel when i make changes on channel MAXMSGL or change any of queue/channel properties from mqexplorer ?
my mq level: 7.5.0.3 p750-003-140123
Thanks
RD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| rahuldhanpal wrote: |
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| Just to ease my mind... You are using JMS right? |
Yes.
Sorry, the earlier trace which i sent across is the wrong timestamp.
And going back to basics ..Do i have to refresh cluster or restart channel when i make changes on channel MAXMSGL or change any of queue/channel properties from mqexplorer ?
my mq level: 7.5.0.3 p750-003-140123
Thanks
RD |
Yes you have to stop the channel and restart it...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rahuldhanpal |
| Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Kenosha WI
|
Update: we found that the message size is different on the 2 environments which we were comparing against and planning to bump the MAXMSGL to accommodate large messages(yet to be implemented)
Thanks for all the inputs and suggestions, Appreciate all your time and efforts.
Thanks
RD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| rahuldhanpal wrote: |
| Update: we found that the message size is different on the 2 environments which we were comparing against... |
| exerk wrote: |
| ...or potentially the message size in PROD is larger than that in UAT... |
You'd have saved yourself a lot of time if you'd looked at that aspect earlier 
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rahuldhanpal |
| Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 84
Location: Kenosha WI
|
Agreed!! found that in the traces and the development people were kinda surprised too with the difference  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
