| Author |
Message
|
| duvier |
 Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:00 am Post subject: Trouble with Queue Manager in Windows 2003 Inside a domain |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 3
Location: Bogotá, Colombia
|
Hello
I have a problem Starting a Queue Manager with amqmdain in a Windows 2003 Machine. This Windows is inside a Domain and I have created the required acount mqm in the domain and have configured MQ with the Prepare WebSphere MQ Wizard.
When I start the Queue Manager by command line using strmqm the Queue Manager starts OK, and there is no trouble, but when I close the Windows Session the Queue Manager shut down unexpectly. Then I read that it is because that is normal in windows and I should start the Queue Manager form the MQ Explorer or with the amqmdain command, but when I try this way of starting, it fails with the following message
AMQ5615: Cannot create default objects: CompCode = 2 Reason = 2035.
I don't know why it works if I use strmqm but don't work with amqmdain. Any help would be greatly appreciated
Thanks a lot
_________________
La vida es una cárcel con las puertas abiertas |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Don't use a domain account to control MQ; use a local user.
There have been endless discussions in the forum of why this is.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| duvier |
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 3
Location: Bogotá, Colombia
|
Hi Victor and Peter
As Peter said I am in one of those cases where it is necessary to create an domain account (because the client does not allow the use of local accounts)
The domain account is in the local mqm group and in addition the domain group (domain mqm) also is in the local mqm group
I think the problem is with the OAM, it sounds to me that it does not allow the domain account, only the local admin account (I suppose this let the qmgr start with strmqm but not with amqdain)
One thing more. The domain admin named the domain account mqm (the same as the local group). Could be this the cause of this big trouble? We are going to create a new domain account with another name to see if that solves the problem
Thanks a lot for your help
_________________
La vida es una cárcel con las puertas abiertas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| duvier wrote: |
| One thing more. The domain admin named the domain account mqm (the same as the local group). Could be this the cause of this big trouble? We are going to create a new domain account with another name to see if that solves the problem |
At the very least that is confusing. We use a different name to avoid confusion. I have never read any restrictions as to what that name can be.
Also, dont forget to make sure the ID you are logged onto the server with when you issue amqmdain is also added to the mqm group.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| duvier |
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 3
Location: Bogotá, Colombia
|
Hello
Got it solved at last. The problem was in the domain account, it cannot be named mqm (no manual says this), I created a new account with a different name and everything is up and running ok
Thanks for your help guys
_________________
La vida es una cárcel con las puertas abiertas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
The MQ manuals wouldn't tell you anything about rules concerning domain groups not having the same name as local groups, as that's a Windows security rule and not an MQ one.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
To add some of the rules and hopefully clear some confusion:
In windows you should not have a group name the same as an account name.
However this is current behavior in Unix where the account stands often for the group and vice versa...
In Unix each account has a "primary" group. Where the account and group name are the same the general assumption is that the primary group for the account is the group with the account's name
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| SAFraser |
| Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 742
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
|
| Quote: |
| In windows you should not have a group name the same as an account name. |
In Windows, you cannot have a user ID that is the same as a local group name.
This is very annoying when you have Windows and Unix both hosting queue managers. Or, if you are using a Windows desktop to administer the Unix queue managers, it is quite annoying in that case, too. You must create an "extra" user ID on either Windows or Unix if you wish to connect to MQ between the systems.
I respectfully disagree with the advice to only use a local account to run MQ on Windows. Many Windows admins will not allow local user IDs on servers. So long as you have the proper permissions and group memberships, MQ runs happily in Windows with a domain account. Setting it up can be tricky, and you must get your domain administrators' agreement not to force password changes. But (just my humble opinion, of course) I believe it works nicely if properly administered.
Shirley |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
So if you never use Windows for a server function you will never get annoyed?
Excellent! 
I agree 
_________________
Joseph
Administrator - IBM WebSphere MQ (WMQ) V6.0, IBM WebSphere Message Broker (WMB) V6.1 & V6.0
Solution Designer - WMQ V6.0
Solution Developer - WMB V6.1 & V6.0, WMQ V5.3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| JosephGramig wrote: |
| So if you never use Windows for a server function you will never get annoyed? |
No, if you never use Windows you will never get annoyed!
Shirley - I think your view,though very politely expressed, falls on one key point:
| SAFraser wrote: |
I believe it works nicely if properly administered.
|
My experience (with equal politenss) is that it's too easy to get poor/slipshod/it's-just-a-big-PC adminsitration!
And if Windows admin's don't allow local ids on their servers, mqm just becomes the exception that proves the rule.........  
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| SAFraser |
| Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 742
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
|
Just a polyester has its place in the world of fabric, so Windows has its place in the world of servers.
But neither should be used indiscriminately.
ps Did you guys log in to a unix box to read this post? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| SAFraser wrote: |
| ps Did you guys log in to a unix box to read this post? |
No, and I don't run my SecondLife client on a Unix box either.
This doesn't mean I don't find either web browsing not an occassionally frustrating experience (the technical aspect, not the fine company of chaps one finds on line) nor do I not accept that Windows is a de facto standard desktop client. A somewhat frustrating state of affairs but one as likely to change as there being enough seats on a train in London at rush hour.
My objection to it is is when it pretends to be a server and do real, important, business stuff. In a long winded & frustrating way.
(Not that my business in SecondLife isn't important, but that's another story.......  )
My personal take, other views may be valid, leave me in the 60s with my command prompt and I'll be fine, etc, etc, etc.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
