| Author |
Message
|
| Partha.Baidya |
 Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 1:35 pm Post subject: IIB 10 consideration over IIB 9 |
 |
|
Voyager
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 97
|
We are building a new ESB solution for a customer. The customer does not have any ESB in there environment and they want to create a new solution using SOA. When the proposal was drafted a year back the plan was to use IIB v9. But as IIB v10 is released we are planning to check whether to use IIB v10 instead of IIB v9.
Could you please let us know what are advantages of using IIB v10 while building a new solution considering IIB v9? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2016 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
Or, you tell us what advantage there is to use IIB 9 over 10 for a new implementation.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| stoney |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 03 Apr 2013
Posts: 140
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ruimadaleno |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 08 May 2014
Posts: 274
|
product lifetime ?
yes .. it will be a moment in time where IBM tell us that: Sorry IIB9 not supported any more 
_________________
Best regards
Rui Madaleno |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| ruimadaleno wrote: |
product lifetime ?
yes .. it will be a moment in time where IBM tell us that: Sorry IIB9 not supported any more |
Then a while later there will be a moment in time where IBM tell us that: Sorry IIB10 not supported any more. and so it goes on.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Partha.Baidya |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 97
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| Or, you tell us what advantage there is to use IIB 9 over 10 for a new implementation. |
Still IIB v9 MQ was backbone of Broker. It was stable so far. Now as MQ removed we do not know how the Broker configuration is managed, might be IBM is using file to manage Broker states. We do not know how stable is that configuration.
So we need to have solid justification that we can take the risk of trying a new product balancing the new features IIBv10 is giving over IIBv9.
From development perspective we can have shared libraries instead of static library. But this itself is a big mess in v9. Why IBM did not think about this issue in v9 itself. There is no point of releasing new version after doing some mistake in a previous version. This does not help to convince customers to use a new version.
Could you please explain a little how customer will be benefited by purchasing the new version? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Partha.Baidya |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 97
|
| ruimadaleno wrote: |
product lifetime ?
yes .. it will be a moment in time where IBM tell us that: Sorry IIB9 not supported any more |
Is there any announcement from IBM that how long they are going to support v9 so that we can be informed that if we build a solution then when we need a migration? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| Partha.Baidya wrote: |
Is there any announcement from IBM that how long they are going to support v9 so that we can be informed that if we build a solution then when we need a migration? |
We'll probably get that announcement next year. If memory serves well WMB 7 is obsolete and WMB8 will be so next year. 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
Looking at the APARs raised on IIB 10, I'm in no rush.
_________________
Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ruimadaleno |
| Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 08 May 2014
Posts: 274
|
| zpat wrote: |
| Looking at the APARs raised on IIB 10, I'm in no rush. |
So .. the product is not "mature" enough 
_________________
Best regards
Rui Madaleno |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| paintpot |
| Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 19 Sep 2005
Posts: 112
Location: UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
