| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| z/OS in a MQ cluster |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| mqjeff |
 Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:29 pm Post subject: Re: z/OS in a MQ cluster |
 |
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
A FR needs to be highly available. |
I've read comments from IBM MQ Cluster experts that specifically contradict that. If you have 2 and only 2 Full Repositories, why would either one *need* to be Highly Available? |
You want to make sure that at least one is always running. And you want to make sure that you always define manual clussdr channels to *both* FRs from *every* PR.
Then you can stick one FR on zOS that will be presumed to be "highly available" simply because it's on zed. And then make sure you don't restart the distributed FR at the same time as you're IPLing the mainframe or the LPAR hosting the FR. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:57 am Post subject: Re: z/OS in a MQ cluster |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| If one goes down the cluster will continue to function just fine. |
This is indeed true. But the OP was talking about deliberately not putting an FR on z/OS.
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| As to why you would not want your FRs on z/OS...one reason is that when it comes time to start upgrading MQ on all the QMs in a cluster, you want to upgrade the FRs first. In general, where is it easier to upgrade MQ - on z/OS, or on distributed? |
z/OS. The only platform where you can easily have 2 versions of WMQ running simultaniously, and hence switch back & forth as you test.
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| I just don't think its as whacky as everyone initially thinks when someone chooses a non z/OS QM over a z/OS QM for a particular task. |
I don't have any particular axe to grind on the question of if the z/OS queue manager is dedicated as an FR or also runs a bunch of apps. I've seen it where the architecture uses Unix as you describe for the real work, and the z/OS that runs the legacy apps also is the "highly available" FR.
Again, the OP was asking why you deliberately wouldn't put an FR on z/OS. My point was that if you have a z/OS it's an ideal choice.
I accept that if you don't have one, you probably wouldn't buy one but would most likely go for the Unix solution outlined above.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9471
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| z/OS: The only platform where you can easily have 2 versions of WMQ running simultaneously, and hence switch back & forth as you test. |
I'm certain that you didn't intend to imply that there is a limit of 2 versions (or releases, or modification-levels) of WMQ that can run concurrently on z/OS.
_________________
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: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| z/OS: The only platform where you can easily have 2 versions of WMQ running simultaneously, and hence switch back & forth as you test. |
I'm certain that you didn't intend to imply that there is a limit of 2 versions (or releases, or modification-levels) of WMQ that can run concurrently on z/OS. |
I was indeed using this to illustrate that multiple versions are possible on z/OS. I selected the number 2 simply because the usual case is the "live" version and the version you're upgrading to.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:05 am Post subject: Re: z/OS in a MQ cluster |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| And you want to make sure that you always define manual clussdr channels to *both* FRs from *every* PR. |
All the cluster doc I see says to only define a single cluster sender to one of the FRs. Since its so easy to define cluster senders and you only need to do it once, I wonder if IBM specifically avoided recommending users to define 2 manual cluster senders.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9471
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| Quote: |
| I was indeed using this [2] to illustrate... |
I knew that. But there are many visitors to this site that will read 2 as a factual and literal limit imposed by WMQ or z/OS.
In fact, it is possible to have multiple (2 or more) versions, multiple release and multiple modification levels, concurrently running on z/OS.
In the interest of clarity.
_________________
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
|
|
|
|
