| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Need your experiences using SHARED QUEUES |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| cicsprog |
 Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: Need your experiences using SHARED QUEUES |
 |
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 Jan 2002
Posts: 347
|
We have a need for high availability where shared queues may fit the bill. I’d like some input from those of you that have tried or implemented shared queues. CICS regions would process the messages in a 3-way Sysplex is the plan. Small messages sizes. z/OS v6 is the software level
What kinds of problems did you have installing?
What about recovery?
How problematic is applying the maintenance on shared queues? I see lots of HOLDDATA for DB2 rebinds.
Do you have any reoccurring problems where you had to automate for problems?
Do you think IBM’s current implementation of shared queues is ready for high visibility profit generating applications?
Any other input? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| MucheIsMyHero |
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:42 pm Post subject: Re: Need your experiences using SHARED QUEUES |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 14
|
| cicsprog wrote: |
What kinds of problems did you have installing?
|
The biggest problem at my place was not anything administrative, it was getting the application programmers to code their triggered CICS transactions in a way that allowed us to take advantage of shared queueing. Lots of learning required, particularly if you're a large shop with many different teams using MQ. Getting the CF structure sizing right was a little difficult for us at first, but that shouldn't be an issue for someone with significant MQ experience who has a good grasp of what your application(s) are going to be using (I was an MQ n00b when we were initially implementing shared queueing).
| cicsprog wrote: |
What about recovery?
|
We have been quite pleased with how the product has performed in this area (we are still on 5.3 in the process of migrating to 6). We ran into some problems early on which were addressed with various PTFs and since the application of those we've found our systems to be quite resilient following several system issues which otherwise would have left MQ a potential victim. The Concepts and Planning guide has a pretty good section on this that we've used to prepare recovery-related jobs in the event of anything terrible happening... knock on wood, we haven't had to rely on those in the last 3 years (despite being a large shop with a ton of through-put).
| cicsprog wrote: |
How problematic is applying the maintenance on shared queues? I see lots of HOLDDATA for DB2 rebinds.
|
If you or your shop have a structured maintenance plan then there really isn't a whole lot of additional overhead in this department. The rebinds are a bit annoying but nowhere near enough of a concern to counteract the benefits of using the technology, of course.
| cicsprog wrote: |
Do you have any reoccurring problems where you had to automate for problems?
|
The only issue of this nature that we suffered through (would rather not discuss) has been addressed in V6.
| cicsprog wrote: |
Do you think IBM’s current implementation of shared queues is ready for high visibility profit generating applications?
|
We've been successful with it being used by a multitude of highly visible and business critical applications, with messages being plucked via CICS transactions, WAS, and batch (which we try to avoid).
Having systems pick up and carry the load without any manual intervention is an amazing feeling. IMO it's a technology that is absolutely worth the effort and reliable enough to feel confident with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MucheIsMyHero |
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:52 pm Post subject: Re: Need your experiences using SHARED QUEUES |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 14
|
| MucheIsMyHero wrote: |
| cicsprog wrote: |
How problematic is applying the maintenance on shared queues? I see lots of HOLDDATA for DB2 rebinds.
|
If you or your shop have a structured maintenance plan then there really isn't a whole lot of additional overhead in this department. The rebinds are a bit annoying but nowhere near enough of a concern to counteract the benefits of using the technology, of course.
|
I should add, here, that we have dedicated CF folks applying maintenance to our Coupling Facility systems, and they perform almost flawlessly. We don't have any idea when they apply maintenance to the systems that our structures occupy. If you're responsible for that type of maintenance at your shop, I can't give any qualified advice on how much of a chore that might be... I'm completely removed from it, thankfully. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| LuisFer |
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:39 am Post subject: Q Sharing |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 17 Aug 2002
Posts: 302
|
Hi CICSPROG:
We have QSGs from V52 with only 1 issue (and don´'t remember what) on V52, anything with 53/531 or V6(recent upgrade).
The performance is more elevated than normal queues.
Don't worry with DB2BINDs is a normal maintenance (as Early Codes).
Don't forget the CF structures on Duplexing Mode (hig avalability)
And one thing Shared Queues is a term for IMS on MQ the term is Queue Sharing (so sorry ) the concept is the same (a hard disk on the CF) 
Regards |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
