ASG
IBM
Zystems
Cressida
Icon
Netflexity
 
  MQSeries.net
Search  Search       Tech Exchange      Education      Certifications      Library      Info Center      SupportPacs      LinkedIn  Search  Search                                                                   FAQ  FAQ   Usergroups  Usergroups
 
Register  ::  Log in Log in to check your private messages
 
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support RSS Feed - Message Broker Support

MQSeries.net Forum Index » General IBM MQ Support » 2 channnels connecting to same QM simultaneously

Post new topic  Reply to topic Goto page 1, 2  Next
 2 channnels connecting to same QM simultaneously « View previous topic :: View next topic » 
Author Message
pheiro
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:47 am    Post subject: 2 channnels connecting to same QM simultaneously Reply with quote

Newbie

Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 5

Hi

I need to have 2 channels on a QM connecting to same destination QM at the same time.

Can any one tell me how can i do this?

Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kevinf2349
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand Master

Joined: 28 Feb 2003
Posts: 1311
Location: USA

What have you tried?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vitor
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 2:10 pm    Post subject: Re: 2 channnels connecting to same QM simultaneously Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA

pheiro wrote:
Can any one tell me how can i do this?


In the same way you connect them with a single channel, except you need to apply a lot more intervention to control which is used for what messages.

Also be sure you actually need 2 channels for technical reasons rather than because your client wants 2 channels "to increase throughput". I've heard this requirement a lot, and they always go quiet when I point out that, despite there being 2 channels, the messages are actually going over the only network link between the 2 queue managers.

I was once told (as part of this) that even though there was a single network cable, using 2 channels "would double the available bandwidth". I thought the network guy was going to choke.....
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fjb_saper
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20696
Location: LI,NY

Well let me give it straight to you....
It seems that the channel process can throttle IO for you....
I run 2 channels from a mainframe to a distributed qmgr.
At peak time both xmitq queues fill rapidly (due to a batch process)
But the throughput with both channels is effectively better than with a single channel...(no changes to bandwidth)... Go figure....
_________________
MQ & Broker admin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Vitor
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA

fjb_saper wrote:
But the throughput with both channels is effectively better than with a single channel...(no changes to bandwidth)... Go figure....


Well I'll be!

I feel an experiment coming on....
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WMBDEV1
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sentinel

Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 888
Location: UK

Vitor wrote:
fjb_saper wrote:
But the throughput with both channels is effectively better than with a single channel...(no changes to bandwidth)... Go figure....


Well I'll be!


I guess it depends where your bottleneck is. If you really are maxxing out your network bandwidth then I suspect this approach will not make any difference.

Just my ramblings though and not based on any proof......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fjb_saper
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20696
Location: LI,NY

WMBDEV1 wrote:

I guess it depends where your bottleneck is. If you really are maxxing out your network bandwidth then I suspect this approach will not make any difference.

Just my ramblings though and not based on any proof......

It was just plain to us that the bottle neck was not the bandwidth...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
pheiro
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Newbie

Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 5

well guys thanks for the small informative discussion!

can any one tell me wots the problem when i try to open 2 channels on the same XMITQ?

Does opening the first channel apply some kind of lock on that transmission queue
I get a 4063 code back when i start the second QMGR parallely
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PeterPotkay
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poobah

Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7717

pheiro wrote:
Does opening the first channel apply some kind of lock on that transmission queue.

Yes.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SAFraser
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shaman

Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 742
Location: Austin, Texas, USA

Quote:
can any one tell me wots the problem when i try to open 2 channels on the same XMITQ?

Does opening the first channel apply some kind of lock on that transmission queue
I get a 4063 code back when i start the second QMGR parallely


I don't understand what you are trying to do.

You want two channels on two separate queue managers connecting to a single channel on a third queue manager? I am confused by "same XMITQ" and "second QMGR".

Or you want two separate channel pairs on a single queue manager which connect to a remote queue manager? Which, as Vitor points out, will requires decisions about what data goes where.

We do use separate channel pairs for segregating data sometimes, as a convenient way to stop and start particular subsets of data in emergencies. Also, I have used separate channel pairs to separate real-time traffic from batch traffic.

My question is: what are you trying to do, exactly?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vitor
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA

pheiro wrote:
Does opening the first channel apply some kind of lock on that transmission queue
I get a 4063 code back when i start the second QMGR parallely


As my worthy associate says, it does and for good & sufficient reason! If you have 2 channels you wouldn't want them serving the same xmitq.

I think we will offer better advice with a bit more information of what you're trying to achieve rather than what you're trying to do.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mqjeff
PostPosted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand Master

Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447

The one case where you can share the same XMITQ with multiple channels is with MQ Clustering.

And there's nothing that says that you can't define multiple concrete Cluster Receiver channels, from which dynamic CLUSSDR/CLUSRCVR pairs will be spawned.

So if you really need multiple channels coming into the same qmgr, and you really don't want to have multiple qmgr aliases for the qmgr in order to address that qmgr with, this is the way to go.

Unless you have performance metrics that indicate that you really really do need multiple channels coming into the same qmgr, then you're almost certainly trying too hard to do something interesting at the expense of doing it right.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vol
PostPosted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Acolyte

Joined: 01 Feb 2009
Posts: 69

Multiple channels can serve the same xmitq as long as only one channel is running at a time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bruce2359
PostPosted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poobah

Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9396
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.

Quote:
Does opening the first channel apply some kind of lock on that transmission queue

If memory serves, the MCA opens the xmit queue _INPUT_EXCLUSIVE.
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pheiro
PostPosted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Newbie

Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 5

[quote="SAFraser"]
Quote:
you want two separate channel pairs on a single queue manager which connect to a remote queue manager? Which, as Vitor points out, will requires decisions about what data goes where.


I need to open 2 channels on a single QMGR from one XMITQ pointing to a remote queue.
But as one of you rightly pointed i am able to turn on only one channel connected to the XMITQ.

Can any one suggest if there is a possible way out to spawn to 2 channels from a single XMITQ connecting to a remote Q?

I am using distributed queue and don't have much of an option rite now with Clustering

Thanks!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic  Reply to topic Goto page 1, 2  Next Page 1 of 2

MQSeries.net Forum Index » General IBM MQ Support » 2 channnels connecting to same QM simultaneously
Jump to:  



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
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP
 
 


Theme by Dustin Baccetti
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Copyright © MQSeries.net. All rights reserved.