| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| MQ Adimisitration on Z/os |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| Arlene |
 Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:03 am Post subject: MQ Adimisitration on Z/os |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 6
Location: UK
|
Hi,
We are in the process of setting up MQ, at the moment we have 2 subsystems running in test on Z/os. One of the questions that is causing much debate is who exactly out of our existing depts (we have no separate MQ Admin role at the moment) should be taking care of MQ Admin. I was wondering how anyone else has this role covered....
Thanks
Arlene |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
My 2 cents -
IF you're only running on z/OS then it can be taken up by the system programming team.
If you've got z/OS and distributed platforms then you really are better off defining an MQ Admin role because you'll quickly find MQ straddles so many disciplines; you need a neutral party to fight the network team over DNS & firewall settings, sys progs over storage pools & Unix admins over mount points.
You also need someone to play "hunt the message" when it doesn't turn up where you expect, and there's a full scale investigation through xmitqs, channels, dlqs, etc, etc.
It also helps to have a separate MQ "team" to champion the best practice use of the product, rather than let the sys progs set it up as best they can & the developers pick the design that looks "nicest" rather than optimise the use of the product.
Other viewpoints could have equal merit. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Arlene |
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 6
Location: UK
|
| Thanks for your thoughts, MQ will be on Z/os and distributed platforms, at the moment we seem do have divided camps, some say Sys. Progs (which I agree with), others say the DBA's and then we have the Operations Support team wanting to take on the admin role. We've got a meeting scheduled to 'discuss' this later today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Of those options, I would have said Operations Support. MQ on z/OS is markedly different to MQ on distributed platforms, leading to an amount of cross training. Ops Support also are probably not platform biggots, like sys progs and Unix admins..... 
Don't let the DBAs do it. Too many people try and use MQ as a database as it is already, the last thing you need is a MQ admin who thinks "queue" and "table" are interchangable terms!!
(If you have a look through the forum, you'll see a number of posts around the long term storage of messages a la database table. Most of them describing the problems it's causing and asking for help!).
Other viewpoints remain potentially valid. Apart from the bit about storing messages in queues, which is anti-pattern and a universally bad thing!
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
My view is that the sysprogs should own the software install, and the MQ admins should own the qmgr configurations.
It sounds like your OpsSupport is going to be the MQ admins - so.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
