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 » WebSphere Message Broker (ACE) Support » WMB Speed Control

Post new topic  Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 WMB Speed Control « View previous topic :: View next topic » 
Author Message
Vitor
PostPosted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

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

Vitor wrote:
PeterPotkay wrote:
Meanwhile the queuing occurs in the XMITQ on QM1, where disk space is abundant and sanity rules.


Sanity does not rule; they own that queue manager as well. Key reason the broker's not in the mqm group for it's own queue manager.

Good idea though.


It's such a good idea I'm going to use it. We have both the queue on QM2 and the xmitq on QM1 set to the maximum safe maximum depth (!) and a channel as described. The putting flow reacts to a queue full error by cycling round and round with timer nodes until the message goes. Hence no queue reaches a depth likely to alarm the WMQ team, the downstream app still picks at it's food and all's right with the world.

Sorted.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mqjeff
PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2012 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand Master

Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447

Vitor wrote:
Sorted.

Until the other shoe drops, and the customers of the end-system start complaining that everything takes too long.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vitor
PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2012 4:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

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

mqjeff wrote:
Vitor wrote:
Sorted.

Until the other shoe drops, and the customers of the end-system start complaining that everything takes too long.


Oh, that's already dropped. The people dropping the 90k file have very tight timelines for it's processing (file's not going to be available until late afternoon, needs to be all the way downstream by 6pm, etc) and are already talking about "optimizing" the process.

I might have casually & accidentally mentioned to the project manager how much trouble I was having slowing down the broker because the other systems can't manage the throughput the way I can.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nathanw
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Knight

Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 550

I know this is opening an old thread BUT

Vitor did you ever sort this?

What process did you end up following?

Many thanks
_________________
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard drive?

Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity.

Only the User Trace Speaks The Truth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
mqjeff
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand Master

Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447

nathanw wrote:
I know this is opening an old thread BUT

Vitor did you ever sort this?

What process did you end up following?

Many thanks


I'm sure he deferred handling it until he could upgrade to IIB v9 and get built-in functionality.

Isn't it great when the product adds new function to meet customer demand like this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vitor
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2013 5:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grand High Poobah

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

nathanw wrote:
Vitor did you ever sort this?


Yes - I got the project that wanted this cancelled.

Seriously, I implemented the solution indicated above with the Timer nodes which worked quite well but the fundamental problem of the downstream process not being able to process 90K of records that arrive mid-afternoon before the hard stop of 6pm proved insurmountable.

As my most worthy associate correctly points out, the solution was a holding action until I can get IIBv9 in place. This site was in the beta program for IIB principally for this new function, which is kinda cool.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence.
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, 3, 4 Page 4 of 4

MQSeries.net Forum Index » WebSphere Message Broker (ACE) Support » WMB Speed Control
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.