| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| vinay.gollapalli |
 Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 9:10 am Post subject: Re: 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 22 Aug 2017
Posts: 22
|
What is the problem with channel and why it is not able to consume them ?
If you need messages to be cleared from xmitq queue , create one more xmitq queue and copy messages from this queue to the neeq queue but before that make sure to have trigdata of xmitq queue is remvoed so that it will not stop moving messages.
| narayanarvr wrote: |
Hi All,
I am facing a problem, 3 lack messages stuck in transmission queue and in hung state, not clearing, what is the best way I could clear without loosing, and queue manager is running. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| exerk |
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:51 am Post subject: Re: 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| What is the problem with channel and why it is not able to consume them ? |
Good start...
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| If you need messages to be cleared from xmitq queue , create one more xmitq queue and copy messages from this queue to the neeq queue but before that make sure to have trigdata of xmitq queue is remvoed so that it will not stop moving messages. |
...but a poor finish. What will the above do precisely? At most it's going to introduce complexity (and it's easier to temporarily increase the XMITQ depth while the issue is resolved, or stop the application producing more messages if possible), at least it's going to give you two XMITQs to deal with and the possibility of duplicate messages - because you suggested copying them.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| vinay.gollapalli |
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:00 am Post subject: Re: 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 22 Aug 2017
Posts: 22
|
Actually it was my mistake for not giving correct explanation before giving some suggestions .
For your point of increasing maxdepth for a transmit queue is a good point but still there are already 300k messages pending on the queue and it will just increase burden on queue .
There are multiple reasons for messages are not flowing via Sender channel to other side .
1) Either downstream qmgr was down.
2)Network issue .
3)may be some messages are broken on the queue which is not allowing message flow .
My point was that let them first move all messages in batches by just pointing channel to new xmitq and atleast they will come to know where exactly problem lies .
| exerk wrote: |
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| What is the problem with channel and why it is not able to consume them ? |
Good start...
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| If you need messages to be cleared from xmitq queue , create one more xmitq queue and copy messages from this queue to the neeq queue but before that make sure to have trigdata of xmitq queue is remvoed so that it will not stop moving messages. |
...but a poor finish. What will the above do precisely? At most it's going to introduce complexity (and it's easier to temporarily increase the XMITQ depth while the issue is resolved, or stop the application producing more messages if possible), at least it's going to give you two XMITQs to deal with and the possibility of duplicate messages - because you suggested copying them. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:44 am Post subject: Re: 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| For your point of increasing maxdepth for a transmit queue is a good point but still there are already 300k messages pending on the queue and it will just increase burden on queue... |
Yes, it will, but why increase that burden to two queues?
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
...There are multiple reasons for messages are not flowing via Sender channel to other side .
1) Either downstream qmgr was down.
2)Network issue .
3)may be some messages are broken on the queue which is not allowing message flow... |
Please explain 'broken messages' because that's a new one on me unless you mean someone has deliberately put messages to the XMITQ and those messages do not have a valid transmission header.
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| ...My point was that let them first move all messages in batches by just pointing channel to new xmitq and atleast they will come to know where exactly problem lies... |
How will they know? Why not examine the queue manager logs and see if there's a message sequence number mismatch, or a communications issue etc.? Why not do some basic fault diagnosis before randomly trying 'something'?
Your problem determination is flawed, i.e. rather than determining the problem you are likely to add to it.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| vinay.gollapalli |
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:52 am Post subject: Re: 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 22 Aug 2017
Posts: 22
|
| exerk wrote: |
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| For your point of increasing maxdepth for a transmit queue is a good point but still there are already 300k messages pending on the queue and it will just increase burden on queue... |
burden in the sense as they are not able to find out why there are 300k messages pending on the queue , the question is to how to clear up messages on the queue with out loosing them .
Yes, it will, but why increase that burden to two queues?
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
...There are multiple reasons for messages are not flowing via Sender channel to other side .
1) Either downstream qmgr was down.
2)Network issue .
3)may be some messages are broken on the queue which is not allowing message flow... |
I mean to say bad message may be some application could have published on remote queue which landed on xmitq queue .
Please explain 'broken messages' because that's a new one on me unless you mean someone has deliberately put messages to the XMITQ and those messages do not have a valid transmission header.
| vinay.gollapalli wrote: |
| ...My point was that let them first move all messages in batches by just pointing channel to new xmitq and atleast they will come to know where exactly problem lies... |
How will they know? Why not examine the queue manager logs and see if there's a message sequence number mismatch, or a communications issue etc.? Why not do some basic fault diagnosis before randomly trying 'something'?
I totally agree with this point as i already mentioned i just replied to his query on his requirement .
point noted and will make sure to keep things straight and provide flawless answers by not confusing .
Your problem determination is flawed, i.e. rather than determining the problem you are likely to add to it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:22 pm Post subject: Re: 1 lakh = 1 hectokilo- ? |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2538
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| rekarm01 wrote: |
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| Clearly Bruce I'll have to disagree 1K is still 1,000 units (see Kg, Km, KJ etc...) |
'k' as in 'kilo' is lower-case, and represents a factor of 1,000, according to the SI.
Upper-case 'K', has usually been used informally to represent 1,000, and 'M' has sometimes been used to represent 1,024,000, but 'K', 'M' and 'G' have also been used more formally to represent powers of 1,024, specifically for describing computer memory capacity.
To avoid ambiguity, the IEC, among others, has published standards for separate binary prefixes about 20 years ago, but they haven't really caught on yet. |
http://www.npl.co.uk/reference/measurement-units/si-prefixes/
True, "k" is "1000" in SI, but upper case "K" also has very common use in scientific and electronics literature to represent "1000".
It really should have been "K" in the SI standard, because all other multipliers >1 are uppercase and all multipliers <1 are lower case!
The multiplier for "micro" is also problematic, as it is the Greek letter mu (μ), whereas all other letters are English. I have found that mu is quite often written as the English "u". No one seems to be overly concerned about this.
It appears that SI will always be at odds with JEDEC, so intepretation of k, m, g, etc, depends on context.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:26 pm Post subject: Re: 3 Lack (=300,000) messages stuck in Transmission queue |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| narayanarvr wrote: |
Hi All,
I am facing a problem, 3 lack messages stuck in transmission queue and in hung state, ... |
Please provide a better description of the issue you are seeing. There is no channel state (status) of 'HUNG'.
| narayanarvr wrote: |
| ... not clearing, what is the best way I could clear without loosing, and queue manager is running. |
I'm going to presume that the messages have important information in them, and that merely 'clearing' them from the xmit queue represents a bad business decision.
Exactly and precisely, what errors do you find in the errors directories on BOTH qmgrs? What state are the channels in at both ends of the channels?
_________________
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
|
|
|
|
