| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| 2058 when connecting to local & remote qm's from one pro |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| antishok |
 Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 6:44 am Post subject: 2058 when connecting to local & remote qm's from one pro |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 31
|
Hi,
I'm running 2 MQ servers (5.3) on two PCs with windows, using AMI for C++
My application on the first PC needs to connect both to local queues and connect as a client
to the remote server.
I've created a AMQCLCHL.tab file which points to the second server.
When I connect (open the AMI session) to the local queue manager first, and then
to the remote one, the remote connection fails, giving me MQ error 2058 - I'm assuming that it is
trying to connect to the queue manager at the local host, ignoring the tab file
When I connect to the remote one first, it connects and works,
but then when I connect to the local one, it seems to connect (no exception is thrown) but my sent message
does not appear on the queue. (the queue is actually a remote definition of a queue on the remote server)
any advice?
I know I haven't given much details, but I'm not sure which other details are needed,
please let me know what additional info I should supply
Thank you,
Uri Gilad |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
You need to connect to both qmgrs as a client, regardless of the fact that one is a local qmgr.
This means you need to specify your connection with hostname,channel, and port.
Probably, the AMI (which is deprecated and you shouldn't use for anything new) is deciding that you want to use a bindings connection if you connect to the local qmgr first.
You should a) make sure your v5.3 is running at CSD13 (or the latest, if a newer one has snuck out when I wasn't paying attention)0, and b) probably switch to using XMS instead of AMI.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| antishok |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 31
|
connecting only as a client did the trick,
thank you very much 
indeed, we are planning to switch to XMS asap
AMI is a load of crap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| antishok wrote: |
| AMI is a load of crap |
As jefflowrey points out, the corect term is "depreciated", but from a functional standpoint you're quite right! 
This is why IBM depreciated AMI and produced XMS.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Actually, what I've been told is that AMI was deprecated because nobody other than IBM adopted the standard...
And they produced XMS because you can't use JMS from C++.
_________________
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
|
|
|
|
