| Author |
Message
|
| muralihegde |
 Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:18 am Post subject: IIB 10 and MQ Appliance |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 108
|
Has anyone already configured IIB10 that connects an MQ Queue Manager running on MQ Appliance?
The MQ Appliance info center mentions that QMs on the appliance cannot act as transaction managers, but can participate in global transactions as resource managers.
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SS5K6E_9.0.0/com.ibm.mqa.doc/planning/pl00006_.htm
Does this impact the way the transaction co ordination that works within the message flows today, i.e the implicit commit/roll back when we set the transaction property to the default of Yes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
There shouldn't be any significant difference between using a qmgr on an appliance and using a qmgr on any machine other than the IIB machine.
You won't, of course, be able to run IIB on the appliance hardware itself.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| muralihegde |
| Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 108
|
| Is there an impact or challenge if we migrate the Queue Manager that supports the IIB to the MQ appliance, if some of our message flows use aggregation ? We plan to do some tests on this and will update the results here, but has any one tried this and have any suggestions and recommendations please do post the same.. Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7717
|
| muralihegde wrote: |
| Is there an impact or challenge if we migrate the Queue Manager that supports the IIB to the MQ appliance, if some of our message flows use aggregation ? |
Yes. It has nothing to do with the MQ Appliance and everything to do with not having a local queue manager available on the same O/S as your IIB 10 installation.
The following link talks about the things that won't be available to use in IIB 10 if you don't have a local queue manager.
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSMKHH_10.0.0/com.ibm.etools.mft.doc/bb28660_.htm
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
You can, of course, use both a local and a client connected QM at the same time.
No good reason to lose all that IIB functionality since you get a MQ license with IIB anyway. How hard is it to create a QM? (Not very).
_________________
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 |
|
|
| muralihegde |
| Posted: Thu May 25, 2017 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 108
|
True, as of now we have the local QM on the same server as IIB. However we are consolidating all QMs to the MQ Appliance. The goal is to remove all the QMs on individual servers, so all QMs can be maintained on the Appliance. Also to save the cost of any MQ maintenance and license.
However I see the point, may be this QM alone we may not migrate since the license is already part of the IIB.
I wanted explore however if there are any other work around before we go down that path.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu May 25, 2017 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| muralihegde wrote: |
| I wanted explore however if there are any other work around before we go down that path.. |
The IIB software requires a locally installed queue manager to support those features that require it (there's a list in the documentation). If you don't plan to use those features, you don't need a queue manager - it's not an installation requirement.
In my personal view, we can look forward to a day when a local queue manager will not be required as those features are adjusted to use methods other the queue manager to support them. So you could easily consolidate onto an MQ Appliance with a remediation plan that IIB will consolidate when the software allows.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Thu May 25, 2017 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
I don't think I will look forward to a less transactionally safe method than MQ.
If IBM start using a native file system to hold transactional state, I am moving my money to a bank that keeps using MQ.
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
