| Author |
Message
|
| George Carey |
 Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 11:34 am Post subject: JNDI .bindings file |
 |
|
Knight
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 500
Location: DC
|
Can an old version of the JNDI .bindings file be used on a new version of MQ?
Say V6.0.1 .bindings file vs V6.0.2.2 ...
Happened to notice a check sum difference when I ran same script in new Version of MQ ... which would make sense if QCF classes, etc. changed from Version to Version.
But if MQ clients using new Version of MQ say 6.0.2.2 from 6.0.1 but JMSAdmin was not rerun to recreate new .bindings file ... what are likely ramifications, if any. Nothing changed in definitions.
Regards
_________________
"Truth is ... grasping the virtually unconditioned",
Bernard F. Lonergan S.J.
(from book titled "Insight" subtitled "A Study of Human Understanding") |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| George Carey |
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 3:55 pm Post subject: Adding more info |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 500
Location: DC
|
I ran the JMSAdmin command on a copy of the old(er) '.bindings' file under new Version of MQ and displayed all properties of JNDI objects used with display command(e.g):
display qcf(*)
display xaqcf(*)
display q(*)
And every object was accessed and displayed properly with new Version.
Is that to be expected in general or not ?
_________________
"Truth is ... grasping the virtually unconditioned",
Bernard F. Lonergan S.J.
(from book titled "Insight" subtitled "A Study of Human Understanding") |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
I believe that the object is placed into the context with it's class name.
So this would only be a reference and not a serialized class. You need the jars on the classpath. As long as the classname behind the objects does not change I believe you will be able to use the .bindings file for the newer version. But then that's just me. I expect to be corrected by some folks out of Hursley... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| George Carey |
| Posted: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:42 pm Post subject: currently working |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 500
Location: DC
|
Well it is currently working with the new version jars of V6.0.2.2 on the old v6.0.1 .bindings file ... but that may be just serendipidous/luck ... not sure if it would still work if using v7.1 say of MQ.
Would like to hear a definitive if/if not and why.
Thanks for your feedback
_________________
"Truth is ... grasping the virtually unconditioned",
Bernard F. Lonergan S.J.
(from book titled "Insight" subtitled "A Study of Human Understanding") |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| George Carey |
| Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:33 am Post subject: hursley |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 500
Location: DC
|
| Quote: |
| ... I expect to be corrected by some folks out of Hursley |
Heard any corrections ... yet ?
_________________
"Truth is ... grasping the virtually unconditioned",
Bernard F. Lonergan S.J.
(from book titled "Insight" subtitled "A Study of Human Understanding") |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:11 pm Post subject: Re: hursley |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| George Carey wrote: |
| Quote: |
| ... I expect to be corrected by some folks out of Hursley |
Heard any corrections ... yet ? |
Didn't see any on the thread...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
