| Author |
Message
|
| roshan.171188 |
 Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 3:20 pm Post subject: MQ client chargable? |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 35
|
Hello,
As i've read in other posts on this forum, the MQ client costs nothing and comes as a supportPac but I have read and heard a few times that MQ Client is free in MOST cases and otherwise comes cheaper.
Could someone help me with the scenarios where there would be a cost for Client even is very less. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2014 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2538
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
MQ Client supportpacs have a no-cost license, but you still need to purchase a MQ Server license somewhere along the line so that you can create a Queue Manager to connect the client.
There used to be a cost for the MQ Extended Transactional Client, but this is now no-cost in wmq v7.5. Google for mq transactional client.
Consult your IBM sales rep to confirm.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
There are also various kinds of charges for using clients that talk to queue managers hosted on a zOS system.
Or at least there used to be.
It's not actually the client that costs money, it's really the system on the mainframe that accepts client connections that costs money.
I also believe that it's not free for MQ clients that are *not* part of the organization that's licensed for MQ. So if company A has a queue manager, it's not necessarily free for company B to run MQ client apps, without also buying a license for a queue manager.
Again, check with your IBM sales rep to be sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
mqjeff,
At release of MQ 8, the Client Attachment Facility for z/OS became no-cost for all supported versions (afaik and what I've been told).
Note that MQ Client transactions are more CPU costly on z/OS than MCA channels... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| JosephGramig wrote: |
| Note that MQ Client transactions are more CPU costly on z/OS than MCA channels... |
I'm a bit confused by this. The MQ Client does not execute on z/OS.
As with midrange MQ, the z/OS SVRCONN channel answers up to inbound Client requests.
Where and how on z/OS are Client-driven transactions consuming more CPU and equivalent transactions on midrange?
All things being equal, MQ Client transactions on midrange should use more CPU than MCA channels.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
I believe the chininit space on zOS is more active on the MF than on midrange. So you will have a high cpu utilization on the channels... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| I believe the chininit space on zOS is more active on the MF than on midrange. So you will have a high cpu utilization on the channels... |
 That's what I meant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| JosephGramig wrote: |
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| I believe the chininit space on zOS is more active on the MF than on midrange. So you will have a high cpu utilization on the channels... |
That's what I meant. |
'More active' meaning more available processors doing more meaningful channel adapter/dispatcher workload, resulting higher concurrent throughput - across all channels and channel types. Is that what you meant?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
IBM Supplied Clients are free, some exotic MQ Clients are/were not free.
Even the IBM MQ extended transactional client is free now.
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2014 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| JosephGramig wrote: |
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| I believe the chininit space on zOS is more active on the MF than on midrange. So you will have a high cpu utilization on the channels... |
That's what I meant. |
'More active' meaning more available processors doing more meaningful channel adapter/dispatcher workload, resulting higher concurrent throughput - across all channels and channel types. Is that what you meant? |
No meaning that comparatively to non mainframe, the chininit space cpu is high... There are some apars/PTFs to avoid driving it through the roof, but if you use server connections on the MF you are going to pay. No additional licenses but additional CPU usage...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
