| Author |
Message
|
| vids |
 Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2003 4:37 pm Post subject: triggering |
 |
|
Acolyte
Joined: 24 Mar 2003
Posts: 68
Location: CA, USA
|
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me how much time will be taken to trigger an application when the message is put to the triggered queue??
When I tested, it takes normally 21 to 22 seconds to trigger an application after putting the message. I'm just wondering if the triggering is taking too much of time.
Trigger type used is FIRST
O/S Windows2000
MQSeries5.3
Thanks
_________________
Vids |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| kolthorr |
| Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2003 5:35 pm Post subject: re: triggering |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 09 Mar 2002
Posts: 31
|
Hi Vij,
That doesn't sound right at all - triggering is usually very fast (< 0.5s, usually < 0.1s). What sort of app is it - is it a Java app that takes a while to start up for example? Is the server short on memory/disk space so everything is running slow?
Cheers,
Andrew |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AlainB |
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 31 Oct 2002
Posts: 79
Location: Belgium
|
As you're using Windows, you may also check that the user has the correct rights on objects. I had a similar problem where the user was not in the NT domain, but in another domain. That was giving really slow startup, and more than 1 min to allow a connect to the queue manager.
_________________
Alain Buret
Visit http://www.fosdem.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vids |
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 24 Mar 2003
Posts: 68
Location: CA, USA
|
Andrew,
When the message falls on the triggered queue, it will trigger a batch file which has 3 visual basic exe files. Between message falling on the triggered queue and the first exe running, there is 22 seconds gap. It takes just 4 seconds to finish executing all the other applications and send the response back to front end.
Alain,
I don't think there is any problem with the authority. MQ Service is running under MUSR_MQADMIN,
So the triggered application will be running under the same user id which has all the rights.
22 seconds are taken between the message put to the queue and the starting of the first application in the batch file. I'm checking the timestamp before connecting to the queue manager. It's not taking
much time to connect to queue manager.
Thanks
_________________
Vids |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Are you using a server trigger monitor, or a client trigger monitor?
Are you sharing an initiation queue with any other tasks?
Can you tell how long there is between when the trigger monitor says that it has started your batch file and when the first app in your batch file starts up?
How are you measuring when the message hits the queue? Are you looking at the put-time? Because that's typically set by the putting application - which might not be running on the same machine and therefore might not have the same system clock. Are you looking at the put-time of the initiation message?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vids |
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 24 Mar 2003
Posts: 68
Location: CA, USA
|
Jeff,
1. I'm using server trigger monitor
2. I'm not sharing an initiation queue with any other task
I'm measuring the time by put-time of the message and the first application startup time. But if the put-time is the time set by the sending application,since the sending application is in different machine, the way I'm measuring the time is not correct.
Sending application puts the message to our queue through remote
queue definition.
How can I get the time at which the message is put to our local queue
(triggered queue)???
How can I get the put-time of the initiation message?? I could not capture the message in the initiation queue. The moment trigger message falls on initiation queue the message is pulled by the trigger monitor. I just want to make sure that the trigger monitor is not taking too long to run the batch file after getting the trigger message.
Thanks
_________________
Vids |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| vij wrote: |
I'm measuring the time by put-time of the message and the first application startup time. But if the put-time is the time set by the sending application,since the sending application is in different machine, the way I'm measuring the time is not correct.
|
That could be your 22 seconds right there.
| vij wrote: |
| How can I get the put-time of the initiation message?? |
It might be in the MQTMC2 structure that's passed as an argument to your triggered application.
| vij wrote: |
| I could not capture the message in the initiation queue. The moment trigger message falls on initiation queue the message is pulled by the trigger monitor. |
Right. The trigger monitor is a listener (get with wait). So it's going to respond to a new message on the trigger queue ASAP, and get it.
| vij wrote: |
| I just want to make sure that the trigger monitor is not taking too long to run the batch file after getting the trigger message. |
Depending on the trigger monitor, you might be able to have it tell you when it started your application. The support pack that supplies a stand-alone trigger monitor service (which runs as a client or server) puts an entry to the Event Log when it launches a process. I don't know what the 'built-in' trigger monitors do (from the Services mmc), but they might do something similar. The supplied runmqtrm/runmqtmc programs write stuff out to stdout(stderr?) when they process a trigger message - that could be redirected to a file and monitored there.
Or you could write your own trigger monitor that would log the info you need however you want.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vids |
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2003 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 24 Mar 2003
Posts: 68
Location: CA, USA
|
Thank you......
_________________
Vids |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
