ASG
IBM
Zystems
Cressida
Icon
Netflexity
 
  MQSeries.net
Search  Search       Tech Exchange      Education      Certifications      Library      Info Center      SupportPacs      LinkedIn  Search  Search                                                                   FAQ  FAQ   Usergroups  Usergroups
 
Register  ::  Log in Log in to check your private messages
 
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support RSS Feed - Message Broker Support

MQSeries.net Forum Index » Clustering » FORCEREMOVE does not FORCEREMOVE: why?

Post new topic  Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2
 FORCEREMOVE does not FORCEREMOVE: why? « View previous topic :: View next topic » 
Author Message
Vitor
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA

svu wrote:
I just found - the channel is in InDoubt state. Perhaps that is why it could not be deleted.


You think?

svu wrote:
Any way to get it out of that state?


Yes - resolve the channel as you would any other in-doubt channel as described in the documentation. Though I imagine the normal warnings about possible loss of integrity & function will not worry you much....
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
svu
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 7:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Voyager

Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 99

Vitor wrote:
svu wrote:
I just found - the channel is in InDoubt state. Perhaps that is why it could not be deleted.


You think?

svu wrote:
Any way to get it out of that state?


Yes - resolve the channel as you would any other in-doubt channel as described in the documentation. Though I imagine the normal warnings about possible loss of integrity & function will not worry you much....
Sarcasm appreciated

Resolving the channel is problematic, because that PR is unfortunately gone. The word of warning is always useful for the old cowboy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bruce2359
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poobah

Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.

svu wrote:
...word of warning is always useful for the old cowboy.


Many (most?) clustering problems are of the self-inflicted kind. If it makes you feel better, know that you are not alone here.

Before I begin hands-on attempting to fix a "problem," I ask myself: "What is the worst that can happen?"

If the answer is a) I don't know; or b) I'm not sure; or c) calamity resulting in death, destruction, famine, ...; then it's time to do research to see what others have successfully done.

This methodology applies to more than just MQ clusters. No, it applies to plumbing, electrical, automotive, ... you name it.

Unless the fix is of the emergency kind, I attempt my fix first in a TEST environment.

Again, I commend you to the WMQ clusters documentation.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
svu
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Voyager

Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 99

No illusions, this is self-inflicted.

This IS test environment, thanks god. But we want to make sure we would be able to recover if things go bad in the prod env.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vitor
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA

svu wrote:
we want to make sure we would be able to recover if things go bad in the prod env.


I think you've proved the desirability of a well thought out and reviewed plan that's carefully executed.

Because recovery of a bent cluster can be problematic. And more time-consuming than the average prod environment can absorb.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bruce2359
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poobah

Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.

svu wrote:
No illusions, this is self-inflicted.

This IS test environment, thanks god. But we want to make sure we would be able to recover if things go bad in the prod env.

And all of this is to make pretty the view from the WMQ Explorer.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
svu
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Voyager

Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 99

bruce2359 wrote:
And all of this is to make pretty the view from the WMQ Explorer.


Well, it is about correct state of all QMs, I'd say:)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bruce2359
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poobah

Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.

Your optimism is noted.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
fjb_saper
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY

svu wrote:
Resolving the channel is problematic, because that PR is unfortunately gone.

No it's not. As the PR is gone, you need to determine if you still need those messages. One way is to stop the channel manually, backout the messages in doubt and inspect them.
I guess that these are mostly intra channel communications destined for the SYSTEM.CLUSTER.COMMAND.QUEUE of the defunct PR. Delete them.
Once there are no messages left for the destination, re-issue the force remove command. This should do the trick.
_________________
MQ & Broker admin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
bruce2359
PostPosted: Tue May 31, 2011 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poobah

Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.

This all took place in TEST, so not problematic at all.
_________________
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
View user's profile Send private message
svu
PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Voyager

Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 99

fjb_saper wrote:
No it's not. As the PR is gone, you need to determine if you still need those messages. One way is to stop the channel manually, backout the messages in doubt and inspect them.

THANK YOU! Once I resolved the auto-sender (with BACKOUT option), then FORCEREMOVEd the QM record - it is GONE!!

I thought I tried that yesterday, but I cannot say for sure.

Thanks to everybody for the discussion and friendly atmosphere
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic  Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2 Page 2 of 2

MQSeries.net Forum Index » Clustering » FORCEREMOVE does not FORCEREMOVE: why?
Jump to:  



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
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP
 
 


Theme by Dustin Baccetti
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Copyright © MQSeries.net. All rights reserved.