| Author |
Message
|
| psb |
 Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:19 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| psb wrote: |
| It seems to be an issue of a backup running and blocking the file, which makes sense. since there's a backup job running every 5 or 10 minutes. |
Now that's a paranoid backup strategy!
| psb wrote: |
| Just mentioning to clarify that that error seems to have been identified, and in case it might have an impact on the other, somewhat more serious error. |
It's interesting that this "backup job" has just suddenly started to cause a problem. It doesn't alter the fact that your entire software stack is out of support (and on a back-level CSD to boot) and your clients are dicing with death. In business terms.
Nor does it alter the fact that MQSIv2.1 wasn't that good when it was new. |
The backup job isn't so much a question of backup, it's a matter of "emptying the queue file I as far as I can understand".
Apart from the entire legacy issue I was wondering if a repeat occurance of the failure to read, could cause a time out on a process which would then ripple through the MSQI and cause the fatal failure and shutdown?
In addition it can be noted that the first crash occured ½ a year ago.
Another occured 1 month ago. The update to flow was added 3 weeks ago, and another crash occured 2 days ago.
It was with the last crash it was deemed a serious issue, reliablity wise, since ½ yearly crashes wasn't considered critical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
So, that is the point we are making.
Your client and you should have no expectation of reliability for software beyond the End of Support date.
Worse, in this case, multiple products are beyond that date and layered.
There are DST changes that are not even available for MQSI V2.1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
| JosephGramig wrote: |
So, that is the point we are making.
Your client and you should have no expectation of reliability for software beyond the End of Support date.
Worse, in this case, multiple products are beyond that date and layered.
There are DST changes that are not even available for MQSI V2.1. |
True, we don't either.
But it doesn't change the fact that there's an issue at hand and an attempt to resolve it has to be made to resolve the problem.
I was posting here hoping someone might have an idea what the problem might be, having encountered the problem before or anything along the line, since several people here are likely to have substantially more knowledge about this than I do.
I'd have to say I really appreciate the thoughts and suggestions I've received so far. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| psb wrote: |
The backup job isn't so much a question of backup, it's a matter of "emptying the queue file I as far as I can understand".
|
Three points immediately occur:
1) You shouldn't be empting the queue file by directly acting on the queue file. If you must empty the queue, script the relevant queue manager commands. It's dangerous (and certainly a possible cause of your problem) to act on the queue manager's internal files except through the queue manager.
2) If the broker/application is not emptying the queue and you have to do it with an external job, you either have a serious design issue or a serious code issue.
3) If you don't know exactly what this job is doing (and why), how can you possibly support the installation?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| psb wrote: |
The backup job isn't so much a question of backup, it's a matter of "emptying the queue file I as far as I can understand".
|
Three points immediately occur:
1) You shouldn't be empting the queue file by directly acting on the queue file. If you must empty the queue, script the relevant queue manager commands. It's dangerous (and certainly a possible cause of your problem) to act on the queue manager's internal files except through the queue manager.
2) If the broker/application is not emptying the queue and you have to do it with an external job, you either have a serious design issue or a serious code issue.
3) If you don't know exactly what this job is doing (and why), how can you possibly support the installation? |
--------------------------------------------------
I can' t say much on 1) and 2) except this was what I was told on the "fly" when I inquired about it. But I'll take it back with me and look into it. Again thanks for the patience.
3) There's a point to it. We don't support it, per say, but the applications using the queue were developed by us, and given the implications it has for the customer, and the fact the version is unsupported means I'm the lucky person In taking a stab at trying to figure out what might be wrong.
We do have people who know more about the MQ itself but they don't know what caused the actual error.
It should be noted that the server has been running for 4 years and has only started acting up in the last 6 months, and as such my goal is to try to identify possible reasons for this that we can then correlate with what we actually do know.
I know it might be like finding a needle in a haystack. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
To add another stream of thought here...
As you have likely observed, others are still running 5.x-vintage MQ. (Anyone want to confess to running 2.x?) Support from the IBM product support team has indeed ended for the release of MQ you have installed.
While all of us here at mqseries.net appreciate your desire to help your clients, they have chosen their destiny.
But, all is not lost. It is possible to engage IBM Global Services (or other third-parties) to provide on-site support for darn near anything - including old and out-of-support software - for money - a lot of money.
This is what I present to clients who see value in keeping old software alive - in theory to save money. "Budget for new software or on-site support!" I tell them.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| psb wrote: |
| my goal is to try to identify possible reasons for this |
The luck ran out? Seriously. It sounds like the client's been taking chances for a while now & it's just gone south.
Slightly off topic - why do your applications say they work on such out of support software? Why not move the requirements up to (say) Win2003, WMQv6 & WMBv6?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| psb wrote: |
| my goal is to try to identify possible reasons for this |
The luck ran out? Seriously. It sounds like the client's been taking chances for a while now & it's just gone south.
Slightly off topic - why do your applications say they work on such out of support software? Why not move the requirements up to (say) Win2003, WMQv6 & WMBv6? |
The MQ works as an intermediate between our applications and other areas of the system. Our applications are forced to utilize the MQ.
To have it all make a bit more sense then 3 years ago the entire aspect of MQ's should have been resolved by a redesign and an implementation of an ESB, but this still hasn't happened.
So the MQ's are long long overdue, they weren't suppose to be "alive" today, and we're trying to keep them going until they can be replaced entirely.
Bruce:
Thanks for the other stream of thought!
IBM Global Services you say,
can you name other 3rd parties that might be available for such services? Just off the top of your head. ( allthough given I'm located in denmark i'd likely have to go for IBM ).
We have kept this aspect in mind too, as the alternative unless we managed to find the cause. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
I'd suggest contacting your local IBM account rep. While IBM does not support 5.x, it does support your account. Your IBM account rep will, when pressed, direct you to places where you can get support.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| I'd suggest contacting your local IBM account rep. While IBM does not support 5.x, it does support your account. Your IBM account rep will, when pressed, direct you to places where you can get support. |
Thanks.
I got a few more leads to follow up on before i resolve to that, and still, maybe hoping that someone who might have had the same error might stumble over the topic here.
I've seen an occurrence of the error before, same file, same line of code, but unfortunately no solution to the problem and the contact was dead, but at least it's an indication that someone might know the reason or have a good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| psb wrote: |
| ...I've seen an occurrence of the error before, same file, same line of code, but unfortunately no solution to the problem and the contact was dead, but at least it's an indication that someone might know the reason or have a good idea. |
And should you be able to chase down that lead, and their solution at the time was to upgrade, what then?
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys.
Last edited by exerk on Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:30 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| ...but unfortunately no solution to the problem and the contact was dead |
This is EXACTLY why a good problem-tracking system, and a software upgrade plan are at the core of a well-planned and well-managed business system.
Those of us with residual gray hair (mainframers) learned all this (the hard way) decades ago. Much of this has been dropped in favor of saving money. You have our sympathies.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| Those of us with residual gray hair (mainframers) learned all this (the hard way) decades ago. Much of this has been dropped in favor of saving money. You have our sympathies. |
Draw comfort from the fact you still have hair to be grey.
I miss mainframe thinking.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
exerk:
Then at least I'd have an idea of whether an upgrade would indeed fix the problem, or whether the problem might not be caused directly by the MSQI.
At the current moment I'm really just trying to find out what the problem is, not so much a solution.
bruce2359 & Vitor:
Hair isn't grey yet ere, this is one of the cases I'd wish it was, if it meant I'd trade it for a dead on fix of what the problem is.
In case nothing further is posted with regards to what the solution is I'll keep posting whatever I stumble over. Including if I do find out what the problem was/is.
Just in case there's someone else with the same problem or something similar outthere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
A quick, related question.
If the MQSI were to crash, would it be possible for it to drag the MQ with it?
or would it only occur the other way around. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
