| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| arguments for changing integrator version |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| csongebalazs |
 Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:17 am Post subject: arguments for changing integrator version |
 |
|
Voyager
Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Posts: 78
|
If there is a very complex and critical system based on WebSphere MQ Integrator Broker for Multiplatform v2.1, and it is working without problems, is there any reason to change its version upto v5.0?
The cost of the integration test is much more than the cost of the technical migration (install, mqsimigrate, ect).
If I am a developer/supplier, I have many reasons, of cousre, but If I am a customer...
I need stout arguments for it.
In the nearest past the publicated end date of the support lifecycle of the integrator version 2.1 was changed to 30 Sep 2006 (from 30 Sep 2005). In this case the elementary reason was eliminated (for a year).
In the following page there is a short summary of the major new features:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/integration/wbimessagebroker/v5/faqs.html
A customer doesn't care about the newest, hitech, Eclipse based developing tool, just cost and result (functionality, performance) of the development.
If there is no need to use new HTTP feature, actually I can hardly show the necessity of the change.
So, Is there any strong argument (for example highest performance, reliability, etc)?
Thanks
Balazs |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
The longer you go without upgrading, the more expensive the upgrade will be.
Also, to say at any point "The business will not need this feature in the next x period of time" is to fail to accept that change is a required part of doing business. You can't anticipate the unexpected, and it is better to be positioned where you can react quickly, rather than slowly. It is a better service to your customers to assist them in facing and managing change than to assist them in digging in their heels.
There's also the fact that, even with continued support, there are certain things that will not ever be added to the 2.1 release - like full support for XML Schemas, support for MIME parsing, and other such. The longer you go without upgrading, the wider that gap will be - and the more likely that something will come along in that gap.
In my opinion.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| malammik |
| Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 27 Jan 2005
Posts: 397
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
To help you make a better decision, you should also look at the bugs that had been fixed between what you have and what's the latest. There might be a serious problem that you just haven't run into. What might happen in the future is you will run into this problem possibly in production and you will have to upgrade in emergency state without due preparation, care and dilligence. I have the latest infocenter running and can tell you what features had been added in 5.0 and after. Let me know if you are interested.
_________________
Mikhail Malamud
http://www.netflexity.com
http://groups.google.com/group/qflex |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2005 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
My opinion, having just upgraded to 5.0...All things being equal, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
As I once read in a post a post about 2.1 to 5.0: exchanging known problems (2.1) for unknown (5.0)???
If you are at 2.1, and it is very stable for you, and all your developers are very efficient in working in that version, and the performance is adequate, and you don't need the new features (Jeff's point is valid that you don't know what tomorrow, or 5 minutes from now, will bring), and you will be able to upgrade in 2006 to 5.0, then I would wait. In 2006, it should be at CSD7 or CSD8, by which time 5.0 should be very stable (not that its horrible now at CSD4).
If you have the resources now to upgrade, if you have a lull now in new projects coming on board, so you can freeze the test environments as you plan the upgrade, then maybe upgrade now.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bower5932 |
| Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Aug 2001
Posts: 3023
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
|
| To upgrade or not to upgrade? For what it is worth, I still get questions from people who are using a 5.1 release. When I tell them that they need to move forward to 5.3, they ask about 5.2. I don't think you need to upgrade immediately, but I wouldn't wait until a month before (or after) the scheduled end of release either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| csongebalazs |
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 30 Jan 2004
Posts: 78
|
Is there any stability problem with 5.0 with CSD4?
Sorry for this naive question, but it's a very important think.
Hi,
Balazs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
so far it seems OK.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
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
|
|
|
|
