| Author |
Message
|
| flar |
 Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:28 am Post subject: z/os MQ limits with 15 Gbytes persistent data |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 04 Apr 2005
Posts: 2
|
Hi,
I got a request about z/os MQ limits/problems
A project wants to move 13,3 Gbytes with MQ (persistent) on single mainframe.
Consequences so far found (IBM red book)
1) 13,3 Gbytes persistent MQ data means about 30 Gbytes of MQ log capacity.
2) Data limit for 1 MQ q is 2 Gbytes
Anyone who has experienced these kind of numbers please post additional consequences and what you have to consider before taking this into production. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| flar |
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 04 Apr 2005
Posts: 2
|
Thx Michael,
It is 13 Gb in one go |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JLRowe |
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 664
Location: South East London
|
Blimey, What's he doing?, streaming paris hilton videos over MQ?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| timna wrote: |
| Blimey, What's he doing?, streaming paris hilton videos over MQ? |
must be as the requirement is persistent 
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
seriously, what is 13GB and needs to move in one go persistently?
I would almost advice against using MQ for this...
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sebastianhirt |
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 07 Jun 2004
Posts: 620
Location: Germany
|
Printing and faxing might be taking a long time, though  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
