| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| MQ data structure alignment |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Would this be useful to you? |
| greatly |
|
25% |
[ 1 ] |
| some |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| not a lot |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| not at all |
|
75% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 4 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| fjb_saper |
 Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2020 5:04 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20729
Location: LI,NY
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| jojo2020 wrote: |
| The question then arose, if IBM presented the data structures as YAML then that would separate the model from the code. This would speed up development and reduce model tests & bugs. |
Again, my 2 cents:
These MQ structures (especially the examples you've quoted) are low level and are inextricably linked to the code, to the point where byte alignment can matter. With this kind of structure (and this counts double for exits) you're right down on the metal, the model is the code and there's nothing human friendly about the environment.
As anyone who's written a dodgy exit and crashed a queue manager will confirm.
I don't see the value of using YAML for this kind of data description as it's another, additional, level of abstraction with no added benefits. That's not to say there isn't value, just that I'm not seeing it.
If IBM starts shipping YAML I won't use it, but I won't complain either. I would prefer IBM to devote their efforts to the laundry list of other things we've been complaining about for years.
 
Like I said, my 2 cents, other opinions are equally valid and may be better. |
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2020 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9442
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
This seems to me to be a solution in search a problem. By design, and well-documented, IBM's MQ product is data-agnostic. Any, repeat ANY, type of data current or future may be transported as message payload content.
Would it be nice if MQ structures (MD, OD, CNO, ...) were name=value pairs - like XML, JSON, et.al.? Perhaps. But, what net value does this bring to the robust world of IBM's MQ product family?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2020 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2527
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| jojo2020 wrote: |
These guys have the MQ experience. Whilst learning about the code I saw that the model could be represented in a human friendly way.
I converted the cmqc* header files into YAML and a few of the structures that use them. The question then arose, if IBM presented the data structures as YAML then that would separate the model from the code. This would speed up development and reduce model tests & bugs. |
I can imagine IBM having an internal "master" set of structure definitions that are used to generate the released header files and classes. Or, they steadfastly maintain and update each one of them, because of platform constraints on byte and word alignment, string representations, and sizes and endian of integers and pointers in 32 bit and 64 bit environments.
You could raise a Service Request with IBM to ask if they plan on releasing the structures in a modelling format (eg. YAML - yuck - after using Ansible I am definitely not a fan of YAML). Their response would be interesting.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2020 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9442
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
After all these years, I've finally become tolerant of XML. I've viewed some intro videos on YouTube on JSON and YAML - I am not amused.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2020 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2527
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
| After all these years, I've finally become tolerant of XML. I've viewed some intro videos on YouTube on JSON and YAML - I am not amused. |
After 20 years of using XML, I think it still beats JSON (a derivative of JavaScript specified by Doug Crockford). XML is quite verbose, but it has a strong foot hold. All our IIB interfaces use it.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
