| Author |
Message
|
| broker_new |
 Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 11:04 am Post subject: WMBv6.1-> JNDI for parameters |
 |
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
Hi Guys,
Can we use JNDI for accessing the properties, we don't want to deploy the bar file each time we change the values (don't like the concept of UDP).
otherwords is there any better way of doing it?
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
Put the variables in a DB table and use a timer node to periodically retrieve them (say every 10-20 seconds) and put them into a set of ESQL Shared variables.
Make sure the DB read is also READONLY to avoid inherrent locks. This can be done using the Select with a PASSTHRU.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:07 pm Post subject: Re: WMBv6.1-> JNDI for parameters |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| broker_new wrote: |
| Can we use JNDI for accessing the properties, we don't want to deploy the bar file each time we change the values (don't like the concept of UDP). |
This is dangerously close to a double post of this. Perhaps if you could explain what you don't like about UDP? Given you were happy in your other post to "refresh" the execution group?
Aside from that, a db is probably your best bet. I do have to wonder how often these parameters will be changing that makes a db a better choice than a UDP. A number of sites of my experience have used a db "because these values can be changed by the business at any time", have hit problems and when reviewing the options have discovered the values have been the same for years.... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| broker_new |
| Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
I am trying to find some solution rather than deploying the bar file each time with UDP's updated. i don't like this idea at all
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| broker_new wrote: |
| i don't like this idea at all |
Why not? Articulate your objections.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:32 pm Post subject: Re: WMBv6.1-> JNDI for parameters |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| Aside from that, a db is probably your best bet. I do have to wonder how often these parameters will be changing that makes a db a better choice than a UDP. A number of sites of my experience have used a db "because these values can be changed by the business at any time", have hit problems and when reviewing the options have discovered the values have been the same for years.... |
This was exactly my argument when I proposed my aforementioned DB suggestion to a customer that only ever knew about 'properties files' as a way of initializing apps with config data.
I nearly three years of operation, the DB values never changed.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
