| Author |
Message
|
| sfari |
 Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:59 am Post subject: Queue Accounting for z/OS and Solaris |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 144
|
Hello,
Is there any way to generate accounting data of queues in a common manner for our z/OS and Solaris QMs (MQ v6)?
According the documentation z/OS does not support accounting and statistic messages. I am wondering why there is then an attribute on z/OS queues and QMs to control accounting?
I don't like the idea to parse SMF for our z/OS queues and to read accounting messages for the Solaris Qs.
Thanks,
Silvano |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
You can use a professional monitoring solution, that will use platform specific methods to gather data, and then present it from a central repository.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sfari |
| Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 144
|
We don't have such a monitoring solution. That's the reason why I asked this question.
What about my questions:
- What is the accounting control attribute on z/OS queues for?
- Is there any other possibility on z/OS other than SMF to get such data?
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
What is the business value of the data you expect to get?
What is the business cost of writing and maintaining a solution to gather this data yourself?
What is the business cost of purchasing and implementing a monitoring solution?
What additional values will a monitoring solution provide?
And your question was "how do I gather this data in a common way". It wasn't "Why is there a weird parameter on a zOS queue?" or "What other means do I have to gather acct&stats data from zOS other than SMF?".
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sfari |
| Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 144
|
Sorry jefflowrey, have I asked something wrong?
I have just asked two questions, why is it not possible to answer them? By the way already in my first mail there was the question about the weird accounting parameter on z/OS queues!
Actually I like this forum very much because you can get usually get lot of practical information from the best MQ professionals.
Sorry, but this kind of answers are just disappointing and do not help anybody!
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
You haven't asked anything wrong.
You just asked one question - and I gave an answer. And then I explained a bit more why I gave the answer I gave.
And then you asked new questions.
Which, pretty much, I don't know the answer to as I'm not a mainframe person.
But I will say that there's probably a good reason why the Acct&Stats properties exist on mainframe, and if you looked at the MQSC documentation or maybe the PCF documentation for those parameters, you'd probably find out why.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
IMHO there are 2 issues here:
The answer to your question is that the z/OS implementation of MQ is markedly different to the other implementations. There are specific parameters only available on z/OS (like queue sharing groups) and others that either work differently or don't work at all. Most of the latter allow the value to be specificed but not honoured (like backout threshhold on all platforms). Much of this has to do with the marked different architecture of z/OS and how it both runs software & captures information.
The second issue is that monitoring software is a a well worn trail through the forum. The search button will reveal endless debates on the subject, which all come back to two points: you're reinventing a wheel which others have made perfectly circular; the reduced cost of developing your own wheel is swamped by the maintenance effort required to keep it running and the lack of added value supplied by commerical packages. This value-add offsets the TCO of such products and makes them a better bet.
Like I said, my view, other views may be equally valid, etc, etc.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
