| Author |
Message
|
| Vitor |
 Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 7:44 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| psb wrote: |
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. |
Yes. But don't ask me why.
MQSIv2.1, WMQv5.3.12, Solaris 8ish. MQSI crashed repeatedly due to flow issues (large input message, broker out of memory, long story). Queue manager kept running but threw 2195/2009/2019 errors until it was restarted. ProbeIds was file system & malloc related.
Problem was resolved by fixing the flow so the broker didn't crash. The flow was for a short term business problem & the migration off MQSI was already in progress so not much effort was put into the root cause.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| psb |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
And an update to "close" the issue.
the AMQ6119 CreateFile Rc=32 error that caused the MQ to come to a grinding halt was due to the dear client running a backup service that....included the queues.
And since there's a various amount of data ( 2gb has been recorded in a couple of cases, possibly more at times ), then the backup job, will, when hitting the queues, take more than 30 sec to finish...which happends to be the limit on timeout.
The backup has been running for years, but what set it off is likely a combination of larger queues and a windows patch that seemingly affects something with regards to how locks are handled in windows ( on a win2k Server ).
This part hasn't been addressed since we "just" fixed the backup solution ( don't ask me why the actual queues were backuped up, since a restoration of queues with content in would result in inconsistencies in data. )
The Abend issue has not been adressed since it's not "critical". ie has been there for ages, and hasn't affected performance.
Posting this in case someone runs into the same problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| ( don't ask me why the actual queues were backed up, since a restoration of queues with content in would result in inconsistencies in data. ) |
You have stumbled onto one of those mysteries for which there will be no logical explanation. I'd guess that the restore process has never been tested (validated).
_________________
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: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
Yep, but at least the problem was solved, and a "what" and "why" on the error was found, so in that sense I'm happy.
And thanks for the help to the people here who contributed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| At least they didn't point a virus checker at the q files. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| psb |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 18
|
Actually they did...
But it didnt take long enough to scan them for it to cause any problems  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| psb wrote: |
| Actually they did... |
From the people that brought you the most paranoid backup strategy in the world, the belief that WMQ messages are a virus.
  
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| psb wrote: |
| Actually they did... |
From the people that brought you the most paranoid backup strategy in the world, the belief that WMQ messages are a virus.
|
Who knows what the payload contains? 
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| Who knows what the payload contains? |
Yes, but... on what product would blame fall from transporting such a virus in a message from a queue?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Who knows what the payload contains? |
Yes, but... on what product would blame fall from transporting such a virus in a message from a queue? |
MQ 101: "It's always our fault..."
_________________
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
What are the odds that a sensibly application-encrypted message sitting in a q file in MQ's internal format has a sequence of bytes that resembles the same byte sequence for one of the *thousands and thousands* of known windows viruses out there?
What are the ever so delightful side effects if said virus checker decides to be "helpful" and quarantine *just the affected parts of the file*...
It was bad enough when the virus checker did that to my mail servers internal files - those were pretty much just mbox format.
I am horrified to think of what would happen if it simulataneously removed a random chunk of bytes from both the q file and the log files.
     |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| What are the odds that a sensibly application-encrypted message sitting in a q file in MQ's internal format has a sequence of bytes that resembles the same byte sequence for one of the *thousands and thousands* of known windows viruses out there? |
I agree that a digital accident that creates a binary that mimics a virus is not the most significant threat we face.
I was asked about the virus-as-payload issue during a client site visit.
Unless you do something pro-active...
It is possible to trigger any executable, which includes Windows Word, Excel, etc..
It is possible to write Excel or Word macros that behave as viruses.
It is possible for an app developer to embed a virus-infected Word doc in the app payload.
It is possible that such a message could launch a virus.
What are the odds? If you don't plan for a threat (however unlikely), the odds go from 0 to 1 pretty quickly when it happens.
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
