| Author |
Message
|
| SAFraser |
 Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 6:31 am Post subject: MQ v6.0 in Production - Comments? |
 |
|
Shaman
Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 742
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
|
It's September 2005.... who has MQ v6.0 running in production and what is your experience? Is it behaving under loads? On all platforms?
I notice on the IBM site that there is no planned fixpack yet. I wonder if that is good news or bad news.
It's time for us to develop our upgrade strategy and I would be grateful for comments from others. Thanks.
Shirley
ps Is anyone running MQ on Solaris 10 yet? If yes, I'd love to hear about that, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
Hi Shirley,
We have 2 Linux and 6 Windows QMs that will go live at 6.0 by 11-01-2005. So far no problems in test.
But I have wondered the same thing...its been quite a while since 6.0 came out and still no CSD, and very few questions about 6.0 specific problems.
Either it is very stable, or no one is using it.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2005 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Peter
I believe the answer is nearly noone is using it. If you run QPasa there is a problem with secured agents and I believe we are still waiting for the APAR...
Enjoy  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramires |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 24 Jun 2001
Posts: 523
Location: Portugal - Lisboa
|
I'm using it only in test (Windows). The new GUI interface its a lit bit slow, but the performance is better. Apart of this, I had a pmr opened due to problems mixing a v6 with a cluster v5.3
During that pmr (two weeks ago) they told me a csd is being prepared.
Regards
Joao Ramires |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| Either it is very stable, or no one is using it. |
I'd also go with fjbs answer - nothing is stable in the first version, it's not pessimism talkin' just experience 
For now, it does seem no one is using it, I know only two sites that have begun testing it a few months back, and only one in production. Plenty of sites are still busy with upgrading to 5.3 or some new CSD, or have just finished the upgrade to 5.3 less than a year ago, and are not willing the risk and effort of upgrading to a completely new version.
Apparently there's a known problem connecting the v6 explorer with v5 qms WMQ 6.0 Remote Admin of 5.3 QMgrs (Windows Platform); this could be solved either by a fix to v5 qms or to the v6 explorer (my opinion, better a v6 fix), so this could trigger the issue of a new v6 CSD. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| hopsala wrote: |
| Apparently there's a known problem connecting the v6 explorer with v5 qms WMQ 6.0 Remote Admin of 5.3 QMgrs (Windows Platform); this could be solved either by a fix to v5 qms or to the v6 explorer (my opinion, better a v6 fix), so this could trigger the issue of a new v6 CSD. |
Actually that thread is about trying to use the v5 Explorer to connect to v6 qmgrs...
And it includes a link to an IBM website that lists exactly what is needed to go the other way.
We're not using v6 in production yet. Not for any reason, we just haven't gotten there. I expect when we start building out Process Server, we'll have v6 in the same process.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| Actually that thread is about trying to use the v5 Explorer to connect to v6 qmgrs |
I was referring to EddieA's remark
| EddieA wrote: |
| I have a V6 explorer connected to a bunch of V5.3 QMs. Some directly and some indirectly. The only thing I did notice was an occaisional FDC cut due to a unrecognised Control Block version, but I believe this has been APARed and maybe even fixed. |
But indeed, it seems there's possible trouble both ways. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| EddieA |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 8:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 28 Jun 2001
Posts: 2453
Location: Los Angeles
|
| hopsala wrote: |
I was referring to EddieA's remark
| EddieA wrote: |
| I have a V6 explorer connected to a bunch of V5.3 QMs. Some directly and some indirectly. The only thing I did notice was an occaisional FDC cut due to a unrecognised Control Block version, but I believe this has been APARed and maybe even fixed. |
|
But did you notice my update, where I stated that it was "fixed" for the Production code.
Cheers,
_________________
Eddie Atherton
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V6.1
IBM Certified Solution Developer - WebSphere Message Broker V7.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
You said
| Quote: |
Going back through the threads on the beta newsgroup, it looks like this was only a problem when connecing to a v5.3 QM "via" another v5.3 QM with the Beta. It was mentioned that the Production version of the GUI would only use another v6 QM as an intermediary.
However, I haven't been able to try again since switching from the Beta to the Production code. |
and as i'm a known skeptic, I didn't take that as a "solved" remark 
Plus from what Shirley added on the second page of that thread, maybe there are still problems... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
Just came across this, which refers to CSD1 for 6.0:
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=171&context=SSFKSJ&dc=DB520&uid=swg21216979&loc=en_US&cs=utf-8&lang=en
| Code: |
Problem
You attempt to end your WebSphere® MQ V6.0 queue manager using the endmqm -i command. You find that shutdown hangs if a client application is connected through a SVRCONN channel.
A detailed MQ trace of the problem shows the endmqm process checks a client connection under rrxStopAllChannels() until the connection disappears. The connection should be closed by force. It seems that the thread of amqrmppa cannot close the client connection by force.
Cause
This is a known problem that will be fixed by defect 93717 in Fix Pack 01 (CSD01) for WebSphere MQ V6.0.
Using endmqm -i in WebSphere MQ V6.0 does end the queue manager process, but it leaves amqrmppa and endmqm processes running.
Solution
Apply Fix Pack 01 (CSD01) for WebSphere MQ V6.
Fix Pack 01 will be posted on the Support Summary (CSDs, Fix Packs, PTFs) for WebSphere MQ url when it is available..
|
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| Using endmqm -i in WebSphere MQ V6.0 does end the queue manager process, but it leaves amqrmppa and endmqm processes running. |
?!?!
That pretty much translates to "don't use MQ v6.0 yet, we, uhm, sort of left a few loose ends...". 
On a more personal level, if up until now I told my clients "don't use mq 6 yet, we should wait at least a year to see if it's stable" now i'll tell them "don't use mq 6, now we know it's unstable"  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
Its never going to be "stable". CSD1 will come out, and there will be inevitable bugs, then CSD2 will come out, and there will be inevitable bugs, etc, etc, etc.
5.3 - Is that stable? Its been out over a year. But you are going to apply a CSD. And any one you apply will also have bugs. Looks at this gem for CSD8 and CSD9, casuing me all sorts of greif:
http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=171&context=SSFKSJ&dc=D600&uid=swg21217437&loc=en_US&cs=UTF-8&lang=all
You pick a version, and hope none of the problems effect you. Although I gotta say an endmqm -i hanging seems to be a pretty bad thing to have shipped.
For what its worth, my shutdown scripts seem to work fine on Linux with MQ 6.0 with clients attached, but those clients are just my teams MO71 connections. Tommorrow morning I will try some shutdowns with some vb.net and c clients to see if they hang it up.
To bad the above link doesn't specify more details about that hanging endmqm -i, like client versions, OSs, etc.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2005 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| Its never going to be "stable". CSD1 will come out, and there will be inevitable bugs, then CSD2 will come out, and there will be inevitable bugs, etc, etc, etc. |
I agree, but:
| PeterPotkay also wrote: |
| Although I gotta say an endmqm -i hanging seems to be a pretty bad thing to have shipped. |
There are leniencies for every new release, but some things are too basic to be considered simply as "bugs"... endmqm -i seems pretty basic to me, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramires |
| Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2005 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 24 Jun 2001
Posts: 523
Location: Portugal - Lisboa
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2005 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Is that a placeholder page?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
