| Author |
Message
|
| praveenchhangani |
 Posted: Tue May 13, 2003 9:29 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Disciple
Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 192
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Good Observation there John. These people are really a team of system administrators that manage that particular process as such, therefore they must have the authority to force finish. 
Thanks,Praveen
_________________
Praveen K. Chhangani,
IBM Certified Solutions Designer -
MQ Workflow 3.4. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| sshaker |
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2003 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 185
|
just a clarification.. hope ur aware of this..
audit can be set at process level... at the lowest possible level.. not at an activity level..
and given a chance.. i activiate audit at process level.. because i know for sure.. how importnat a process is for me..
audit to mq looks a better option than db .. sometimes.. any thoughts?
regards
shaker
| Quote: |
| I thought it was best to set the audit trail on ONLY at the activity level allowing you to store information you need only for the program activity it is that you are wanting more information from |
_________________
shaker |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| nwhi |
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2003 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 25
Location: UK
|
Shaker,
sorry to disagree, but whilst the overall audit state can be set at process level, it is entirely possible to set audit at individual activity level.
Use filtered audit to mq, then set the filter on the activity/event you are interested in.
I prefer to use this in a busy system where only certain activity events need to be tracked (but you do need something reading the queue, otherwise it will fill up!). The 'audit to db' at domain level tends to aggrevate DBA's / system administrators becuase of the growth rate.
_________________
Nick Whittle
IBM Certified Solutions Designer -
WebSphere MQ Workflow V3.4
MQSolutions (UK) Ltd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2003 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
Nick:
Just a word of warning.... It is my understanding that Audit to MQ can be up to 30% more costly than audit to DB.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bose_100 |
| Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 1:51 pm Post subject: AUDIT TRAIL QUESTIONS |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 1
Location: MN
|
Hi , I have few Questions.Appreciate if you can get best answers
1. Audit to MQ vs DB, which option is good.
2. Which level of Logging is better?
3. If Auditing to DB , can we send the audit trail to a different DB instance on a diffrent box, with out using the default DB.
4. Will the Auditing level mentioned at Domain overwrite the ProcessTemplate config. (asuming that the INHERIT checkbox is unchecked at processTemplate level).
IF its checked , then Domain Config should overwrite i guess?
Thanks
Bose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 2:02 pm Post subject: Re: AUDIT TRAIL QUESTIONS |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
| bose_100 wrote: |
| 1. Audit to MQ vs DB, which option is good. |
Depends on what you need
| Quote: |
| 2. Which level of Logging is better? |
Same answer... depends. There is no 1 answer here.
| Quote: |
| 3. If Auditing to DB , can we send the audit trail to a different DB instance on a diffrent box, with out using the default DB. |
Not to my knowledge
| Quote: |
| 4. Will the Auditing level mentioned at Domain overwrite the ProcessTemplate config. (asuming that the INHERIT checkbox is unchecked at processTemplate level). |
NO... exactly backwards... it will override as long as the inherit checkbox is CHECKED.. and also be aware, that it is not just domain it is all the way up the entire network hierarchy[/quote]
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| modene |
| Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Posts: 7
Location: South Africa
|
Now, how does one go about extracting the data from the audit trail to determine whether a work item was force-finished?
What are the columns and/or variables one needs to look at?
Regards
Modene
Workflow trainee
From beautiful and sunny South Africa |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
| modene wrote: |
Now, how does one go about extracting the data from the audit trail to determine whether a work item was force-finished?
What are the columns and/or variables one needs to look at?
|
Have a look at chapter 8 in the Administration manual, it lists all the information you need to know about the audit trail.
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| anveshita |
| Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 254
Location: Jambudweepam
|
Well my two cents.
I find audit to MQ is better than Audit to DB for the following reasons leaving the overhaed already mentioned.
1. Audit trail table gets out of hand if you use Audit to DB. For some reason we never cpould archive the table because of the way IBM designed the table
2. Audit to MQ gives flexible options. Once you have the message, what you can do is limitless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
