| Author |
Message
|
| koko |
 Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:21 am Post subject: Seggregating sheduling server |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 206
|
Hi
We have a problem of expiring workitems in day time and as a result RTSINPUTQ is being filled up to max limit . THe GUI users are getting timed out while the q has msgs on it.
WE opened up tickets with IBM and they suggested to run the scheduling server on a different system
currently we have ConfigID - FMC, FMCGRP, FMCSYS, FMCQM, FMCWQM - FMCDB
We plan to add FMCSYS1 to FMCGRP and create a new q say FMCQM1.
But I am not sure how this works. Do I have to modify my FDL to ask it to use the shceduling server runing on FMCSYS1 ???
some direction is appreciated.
Thanks in advance
_________________
Thanks
Koko |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| vennela |
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 4055
Location: Hyderabad, India
|
I was always of the impression that we cannot run scheduling and cleanup servers on the secondary configurations. I don't think this is possible, but this might have changed recently. I have not played much with version 3.6, so I cannot tell for sure.
Let us know if you will ever be able to configure it this way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| koko |
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 206
|
We are on WF 3.5 not 3.6. So what do you propose to solve this problem?
Here is what IBM said
| Quote: |
The fact that you are having many items expire at the same time causes a large number of messages to be posted to RTSInput queue. We can look at fine tuning the scheduling parameters but, depending on the workload coming through, that may not be enough. The large number of messages to the input queue causes the execution servers to bog down. One solution is to create a separate Workflow system under the same system group and dedicate it to processing scheduling items. If you have a second machine it could be placed there. If not we would have to look at whether you could do with less than 8 execution servers to handle your current workload. An example would be to run 6 execution servers under
the current system definition to handle normal work.... then create a new system definition on the same machine with 2 execution servers and the scheduling server to handle only scheduling events. Bottom line is it looks
like it will be necessary to revisit sizing of your solution and implementation.
|
_________________
Thanks
Koko |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| koko |
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 206
|
Hello Jmac,
Where from do you get all your info from ???  . Are you part of IBM's favourite people list or something. Just kidding. The Level 2 support person could not point me in right direction while you seem to find stuff from no where. MAGIC !!!
Thank you very much. I sure will update you as to how it goes.
_________________
Thanks
Koko |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jmac |
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Jun 2001
Posts: 3081
Location: EmeriCon, LLC
|
| koko wrote: |
| Where from do you get all your info from ??? |
I've just been working with IBM's workflow products for a long time (since Dec 1994), so I know a lot of people who know all the good stuff. 
I would really appreciate it if you would let me know how this goes... I have been thinking of trying this since I first saw this technote, and have just not had the time.... If you have any problems with this let me know... becuase I have it on good authority that it will work. It just might be a little kinky to set up.
Regards
JMAC
_________________
John McDonald
RETIRED |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vennela |
| Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 4055
Location: Hyderabad, India
|
| Quote: |
| Where from do you get all your info from ??? |
The reaosn I visit the site so often is to read some of these great things that John posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
