| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| SYSTEM.CLUSTER.COMMAND.QUEUE maxmsgl default value |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| dc01bb |
 Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 6:12 am Post subject: SYSTEM.CLUSTER.COMMAND.QUEUE maxmsgl default value |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Oct 2001
Posts: 17
Location: Bruce Baxter
|
At what point did the default length of the SYSTEM.CLUSTER.COMMAND.QUEUE and SYSTEM.CLUSTER.TRANSMIT queue change to 4GB? Since we've been working on implementing MQ V6 on our distributed platforms, we've begun to see problems on our z/OS (5.3.1) queue managers partial repositories failing to start up because the SYSTEM.CLUSTER.COMMAND.QUEUE was GET disabled. In examining these queues, I noted the MAXMSGL set to 32K, and checked against the defaults shipped in the 5.3 libraries to find them set to 4GB. I didn't do the upgrade from 2.1 to 5.3. Does anyone know when IBM changed the default?
_________________
IBM Certified Specialist - MQSeries |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I'm quite sure you mean 4Mb (4194304), as MaxMsgLn only goes up to 100Mb (104857600), and thus not anywhere near 4Gb... 
The change to a MaxMsgLn of 4Mb as a default was in the 5.0 timeframe, I believe.
But not all of the SYSTEM.* queues ship with a 4Mb default value. The SYSTEM.CLUSTER.* queues, do, though... so if it's set to 32k then it's either a pathological admin or an incorrectly managed upgrade. However, I didn't think that even on zOs that MQ 2.1 *had* a SYSTEM.CLUSTER.* queue set...
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ivans |
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 48
Location: Hursley
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| Ivans wrote: |
| since V2.1 (i.e. since clustering began). |
I'd thought it was only introduced in v5.x. Shows what I know.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ivans |
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 48
Location: Hursley
|
Of course I was barely out of school at the time you understand, so I could be wrong  ... but I think MQSeries V2.1 for OS/390 is equivalent to MQSeries V5.1 for distributed platforms. This was back in the days when product names were less confusing (MQSeries was handily called MQSeries) and version numbers were, well, a little more confusing.
Cheers,
Ian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
z/OS versions are particularly confusing - given the lack of CSDs/FPs/RPs to instead just have APARs.
So the version number never changes, despite the fact that you may have APARd from what was MQ v6.0.0.0 to 6.0.2.1. Or you may have just decided to cherry-pick fixes from that range, and have something that doesn't really resemble any version on distributed.
Not that the new scheme for FPs/RPs is terribly intuitive either.
I'd thought the z/OS MQ 2.1 level was equivalent to v5.0, not v5.1... but I'm sure you're closer to people who'd know than I am. So I'll take your word for it.
of course, it really was the OS/390 MQ 2.1 level, and not the z/OS MQ 2.1 level, as it wasn't z/OS then...
Not, mind you, that I was much further out of school at the time, either.
_________________
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
|
|
|
|
