| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Storage for Multi Instance Queue Manager |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| neilwcasey |
 Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 4:40 pm Post subject: Storage for Multi Instance Queue Manager |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 09 Oct 2011
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Hi folks,
I apologize if you see this question on MQSeries.list as well.
I have an x86-64 Linux environment where I am trying to set up MIQM. The storage team have allocated storage for me (accessed via NFS v4) on an EMS Celerra contact admin.
Does anyone have any experience (good or bad) with using Celerra storage for MIQM? I am trying to work out whether the storage can support MIQM, and it is just a configuration issue on the contact admin and I can get my storage team to fix, or whether I should give up and use a different contact admin.
Thanks,
Neil Casey. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
Using Celerra storage compared to what?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| neilwcasey |
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 09 Oct 2011
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Hi,
EMC Celerra as opposed to say NetApp or IBM N-Series.
N-Series (which is a rebadged NetApp filer) is documented to work when at software level DataONTAP 7.3.2.
I have also tested MIQM using an export from one Linux server to another, using the standing RHEL packages. However, it is difficult to make this configuration highly available, because the storage server would require high availability.
So, my preference is to put the storage onto a highly available appliance, rather than have to worry about it in a Linux VM. However, when using the Celerra contact admin server, the crtmqm fails. I'm trying to establish whether this is because of poor configuration, or because the Celerra software doesn't support the MIQM requirements.
Regards,
Neil Casey. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| neilwcasey wrote: |
However, when using the Celerra contact admin server, the crtmqm fails. I'm trying to establish whether this is because of poor configuration, or because the Celerra software doesn't support the MIQM requirements.
|
Exactly how did crtmqm fail? Did you look up the error that you received?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| neilwcasey |
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 09 Oct 2011
Posts: 9
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Hi,
it was a generic "AMQ8101: WebSphere MQ error (893) has occurred."
An FDC was created.
I searched IBMLink and Google, plus MQSeries.net and MQ ListServer for the module and probe ID without any hits.
I have asked this question on IBMLink as well, and have received a response. I should have spotted it myself since I was already aware of the technote which was referenced by the support team.
Technote:
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21433474 contains the following paragraph...
-----
Multi-instance queue managers do not work with mandatory file locking. The NFS support provided by some contact admin devices enforces mandatory file locking. While this is permitted by the NFS v4 specification, multi-instance queue managers were designed to use the less restrictive advisory file locking scheme and are not compatible with mandatory file locking. IBM has encountered mandatory file locking only with contact admin devices from the EMC Celerra family. Please note that the current version of amqmfsck does not test for mandatory file locking.
-----
So basically, the storage device has been tested with MIQM and is known not to work. I have my storage team investigating with EMC whether there is an alternate mode available which would enable advisory locking rather than mandatory, but given the wording of the technote, I am not hopeful of a resolution with a Celerra storage appliance.
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Regards,
Neil Casey. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
