| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| Extended Transaction Client Lic. |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| IF not using MQSeries ETC, would you, if avaiable without cost? |
| Yes, I would use it, |
|
83% |
[ 5 ] |
| No, I would not use it |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I have no need for a Transactional Client |
|
16% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 6 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| Vitor |
 Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| tsorgie wrote: |
| As i understand it, the ETC is required any time you use an XA connection to MQ. Is that right? |
Certainly if it's a client connection, certainly not if it's a binding connection & I'll let a .NET person answer for a managed connection.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| tsorgie |
| Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 3
|
While i don't have the source for the MQ client; I understand XA very well. Writing an XA resource is complicated, but that is the MQ server, not the client. I would never discount the complexity of writing an XA compliant resource, XA poses a seriously hard contract.
The change in responsibilities on the client from a single resource transaction to an XA one, is only to shuffle the extra prepare call. The client really can't do more, it just passes the instruction to the server. If you read through the code of a JTA transaction manager (i've been deeply through the JBoss one), you see that an XA transaction makes only the single additional callback to the XAResource object (which is how the MQ client fits in).
There simply isn't anything more to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mvic |
| Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 2080
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| While I'm sympathetic about the cost of doing business, it is the cost of doing business. Everything has value. |
Bruce, I agree 100 percent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mvic |
| Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 2080
|
| tsorgie wrote: |
| We definitely need the ETC, and very much dislike IBMs pricing of it. |
| tsorgie wrote: |
Just to triple check; maybe there is a chance that i'm misunderstanding the condition under which the ETC is required.
As i understand it, the ETC is required any time you use an XA connection to MQ. Is that right? |
Welcome.
An application that connects as a client, and runs under the control of an XA Transaction Manager (eg. Tuxedo) has to call XA calls into MQ. These are transported over the client-server TCP/IP connection only if you have the Extended Transactional Client installed.
In fact, if I remember correctly, without the ETC installed, you don't even have the XA entry points you need. That could be wrong, though, because I haven't checked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| As i understand it, the ETC is required any time you use an XA connection to MQ. Is that right? |
More accurately, ETC is required for a client connection that intends to participate in an xa-compliant, two-phase commit/backout.
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
