| Author |
Message
|
| edub1 |
 Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:09 am Post subject: dspmqver showing the base install |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 28
|
All
I have an odd issue. We have a linux install where we've put 6.0.2.6, but dspmqver shows 6.0.0.0:
mqm@test105:/u/labtstl10/mqm $ dspmqver
Name: WebSphere MQ
Version: 6.0.0.0
CMVC level: p000-L050519
BuildType: IKAP - (Production)
mqm@test105:/u/labtstl10/mqm $ rpm -q -a | grep MQ
MQSeriesKeyMan-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesKeyMan-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesSDK-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesSamples-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesServer-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesRuntime-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesServer-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesRuntime-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesClient-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesSamples-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesJava-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesSDK-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesJava-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesClient-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesTXClient-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesMan-6.0.0-0
MQSeriesMan-U819234-6.0.2-6
MQSeriesTXClient-U819234-6.0.2-6
This install was imiaged from another box where we did the actual install and our Unix Admins did what they do to copy things over to the other boxes. There are 16 images, including the original that are showing correct. So this is the odd ball, and we are not quite sure where to look. Has anyone run into this problem? Is there something we can do or go to the unix admin to have them look at?
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Sam Uppu |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 610
|
| edub1 wrote: |
| This install was imiaged from another box where we did the actual install and our Unix Admins did what they do to copy things over to the other boxes. |
Why you are following this approach?. What made you to come up with this solution?.
Copying the MQ binaries from one server to the other is not supported by IBM. You should follow the MQ quick beginnings or Readme file to install the MQ in proper way.
Last edited by Sam Uppu on Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:19 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| edub1 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 28
|
Thanks, but IBM does support us in this effort. It may in fact be a special case, but it is a known procedure.
This approach is taken due to a very large rapidly changing environment with limited people resources. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Sam Uppu |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 610
|
| I dont think IBM support this. Copying binaries from one server to the other wont be supported by IBM. If IBM supports this effort you can open a PMR and check with IBM on this and see what is causing the issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| edub1 wrote: |
| Thanks, but IBM does support us in this effort. |
Then you're much better advised speaking to them than us.
I imagine the "problem" is the higher version not being properly registered, but that's speculation. IBM would know.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| edub1 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 28
|
Guys
I appricate your concern of the support and I'm not here to argue support vs unsupported. We are taking several approches to solving this issue and were hoping to get a responce more qucikly that what IBM can provide us due to time constraints. In short, we can't always wait on IBM to provide us with a responce and try our best to take a proactive approche to reolving issues on our own when forced to wait.
Vitor when you say regesterd, do you mean in the RPM database or something within MQ? If it within MQ then I can wait for IBM, if is with Linux then I will push harder on my Unix admin.
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Code: |
| This approach is taken due to a very large rapidly changing environment with limited people resources. |
Since installing WMQ isn't very time-consuming or labor-intensive in the first place, I can't imagine that you've saved all that much time - especially now that you've encountered problems with this non-traditional method.
The Quick Beginnings manual gives you the commands needed to do the install; and if you have the .pdf version of the manual, you can cut/paste the commands into a script.
_________________
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: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| edub1 wrote: |
| Vitor when you say regesterd, do you mean in the RPM database or something within MQ? If it within MQ then I can wait for IBM, if is with Linux then I will push harder on my Unix admin. |
I'd have said RPM - the question is what exactly is the "thing that the Unix admins do" to copy this stuff over. If they're doing a straight copy this would never work, whereas this works on 15 images and not this one. This implies that this particular copy has been done badly.
Given that your admins think that doing 1 install, 15 copies and 15 goes of whatever hack is getting this working in the belief that this is in some way "easier", "faster" or "better" than 16 silent installs which will a) certainly work, b) certainly be less labour intensive & c) less prone to manual error then their skill & judgement is open to some question.
Also if IBM is supporting this install method, then you don't need to wait - escalate the priority of the PMR.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
RPM is the program manager application. It is the tool that sysadmins use for installing applications.
_________________
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: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| RPM is the program manager application. It is the tool that sysadmins use for installing applications. |
Yes, yes, I lump the whole "installing stuff" into one big pot.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| do you mean in the RPM database or something within MQ? |
Vitor: my post regarding RPM was in regards to this. Post seemed unsure of what RPM is/does.
_________________
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: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| do you mean in the RPM database or something within MQ? |
Vitor: my post regarding RPM was in regards to this. Post seemed unsure of what RPM is/does. |
Ah.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| edub1 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 28
|
I'm sorry, if I gave the impression that I wasn't sure what the package manager did, or how to use it I did not mean to. I was attempting to find out if Vitor meant that he suspected an issue with the way the MQ RPMs were registered in the RPM database (repository where the package manager holds info about installed packages) and thereby causing the issue that we are seeing somehow.
Vitor, it may not appear from my post, but we strongly feel this way as well. The only thing we lack is proof that it isn’t something funky with MQ, because they “didn’t do anything different this time.” We successfully follow this same concept with thousands of AIX and HP boxes. These 17 are a first part of a test that will result in thousands of replicated “cookie cutter” servers and I wish I could go into detail of why we’ve chosen this approach over silent installs like you mentioned, but I don’t have time and it would not solve this issue.
I'd also like to say that if it was an OS issue I do not expect IBM to support it, unless of course it was an IBM OS. They will go in and look and point it out to us if needed though.
While I could, escalate with IBM, I have a hard time doing so on a non-production system that hasn’t even gone live for testing yet. Trust me, we are very demanding of IBM as a whole, but in situations like this I’d rather let it go through the proper channels and do research on my own, rather than abusing the priority system -- especially when I don’t see it as a product issue.
I’ll just take it from the posts as everyone telling me “I don’t know!” and move on. Thanks for everyone’s time and concerns! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| If it worked 15 times and didn't work once, then I'd look at how it was done differently the 16th time than all the rest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
Call me a technical weenie, but I have not had the slightest desire to speed up the process (or for any other reason) by not following the installation instructions provided by IBM. Much of my reasoning is that it works, and IBM will fully support the IBM-supplied procedures.
15 out of 16 is pretty good. Is number 16 worth a career change? What if something breaks as it did here, but much later on? What is in the overall best interest of your organization? This is a question for your management.
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
