| Author |
Message
|
| ravikumarsv |
 Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 12:11 pm Post subject: MQ 5.3 to 6 Migration on HACMP AIX Servers |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 7
|
Hi
I need to do Migragte WebSphere MQ on HACMP AIX Servers. I have done MQ Migration on normal AIX Boxes..
Is there any specific/extra steps needs to be done on HACMP MQ Migration. Could you please anyone clarify me the same.
Thanks in Adavance.
Rgds
Ravi |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
You need to plan which HACMP nodes you're doing when. It's been discussed before & a search should turn up discussions you might find interesting
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| aditya.aggarwal |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 252
|
| Quote: |
| You need to plan which HACMP nodes you're doing when. It's been discussed before & a search should turn up discussions you might find interesting |
There are lot of discussion on mc91 in this forum... !!!!
Ravi Wrote:
| Quote: |
I need to do Migragte WebSphere MQ on HACMP AIX Servers. I have done MQ Migration on normal AIX Boxes..
Is there any specific/extra steps needs to be done on HACMP MQ Migration. Could you please anyone clarify me the same. |
Which MQ Version are you migrating ?... if V7 suggest your client to migrate on multiinstace queue manager from HACMP.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| aditya.aggarwal wrote: |
| ...if V7 suggest your client to migrate on multiinstace queue manager from HACMP... |
Great suggestion - and what happens when non-V7.0 infrastructure tries to connect when the previously-HA queue manager (which presumably no longer has a virtual IP Address to take with it) fails over to the other node? 
_________________
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 |
|
|
| aditya.aggarwal |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 252
|
| Quote: |
| Great suggestion - and what happens when non-V7.0 infrastructure tries to connect when the previously-HA queue manager (which presumably no longer has a virtual IP Address to take with it) fails over to the other node? |
right ...in multi-instance qmgr the VIP are not supported.... to implement this solution...2 mq clients are required for muti-instance qmgr setup.....
i would say it will be completely a fresh implementation..... Because one has to remove the old HACMP setup entirley .. and setup a new Mutiinstance qmgr setup...there may be other considerations which depends on the infra\apps etc.. setup while moving to multi instance qmgrs... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| aditya.aggarwal wrote: |
| Which MQ Version are you migrating ?... if V7 suggest your client to migrate on multiinstace queue manager from HACMP.... |
Would you also suggest migrating from a car to a horse & buggy? HACMP has considerably more features than multi-instance WMQ for failover.
It also has the abilty to failover more products than WMQ. It's likely the OP has more software than just WMQ under the protection of HACMP.
Think before you advise.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fatherjack |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 522
Location: Craggy Island
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| Think before you advise. |
To be fair he did only 'suggest' rather than 'advise' or recommend. Oh! the importance of language! 
_________________
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| there may be other considerations |
I presumed this statement covered the advise vs. suggest issue.
Demand, advise, recommend, suggest, consider, ... damn language.
_________________
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: Thu Jun 17, 2010 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Even a "suggestion" to move off HACMP to multi-instance would be ill-advised. Even if WMQ was the only piece of software under HACMP.
This is nothing to do with the use of multi-instance in an environment where dedicated software (HACMP, Veritas, etc, etc) is not available & is not going to be available in the short to medium term.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| aditya.aggarwal |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 252
|
| Quote: |
Even a "suggestion" to move off HACMP to multi-instance would be ill-advised. Even if WMQ was the only piece of software under HACMP.
This is nothing to do with the use of multi-instance in an environment where dedicated software (HACMP, Veritas, etc, etc) is not available & is not going to be available in the short to medium term. |
So What is the benefit of bringing the multiinstace feature in WMQ 7..
What will be someone desgin, cost considerations for deciding b/w Multiinstance and other HACMP solutions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
Because it is for the future...for when all connecting infrastructure is MI-capable you will probably start to see HACMP gracefully retired, e.g. for Gateways that only route traffic or are client hubs.
If there is an outstanding requirement that can only be fulfilled by HACMP/Veritas etc. then it will be continue to be used.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| aditya.aggarwal |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 252
|
| Thanks exerk ...its a valuable information for me.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| aditya.aggarwal wrote: |
| So What is the benefit of bringing the multiinstace feature in WMQ 7 |
| Vitor wrote: |
This is nothing to do with the use of multi-instance in an environment where dedicated software (HACMP, Veritas, etc, etc) is not available & is not going to be available in the short to medium term. |
What I was attempting to convey is that if you don't have dedicated software then MI is an alternative.
But dedicated software is better. Because it's dedicated.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fatherjack |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 522
Location: Craggy Island
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| aditya.aggarwal wrote: |
| So What is the benefit of bringing the multiinstace feature in WMQ 7 |
| Vitor wrote: |
This is nothing to do with the use of multi-instance in an environment where dedicated software (HACMP, Veritas, etc, etc) is not available & is not going to be available in the short to medium term. |
What I was attempting to convey is that if you don't have dedicated software then MI is an alternative.
But dedicated software is better. Because it's dedicated. |
But possibly more expensive and maybe more difficult to maintain and administer and probably less portable. So maybe suggesting MI as an alternative was reasonable.
_________________
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| So What is the benefit of bringing the multiinstace feature in WMQ 7.. |
Instead of just asking, did you research and review any of the many and various announcement letters, PowerPoint presentations, or video-clips, that outline the benefits of MI on V7?
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
