| Author |
Message
|
| rextency |
 Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:55 pm Post subject: Response going to dead-letter |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 2
|
I am using dynamic queues to send my messages. The problem is the response comes back in the dead-letter queue. I can see the response that I'm suppose to get appended to the DLQ structure.
The DLQ response code is 524288 which defines to MQZAO_CHANGE. I guess this has something to do with the authorization, but I dont know what. I've set +alladm +allmqi, and the other + options available to the queue manager.
What am I missing? Why would a message appear on the DLQ with this reason code?
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| tleichen |
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject: Re: Response going to dead-letter |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 663
Location: Center of the USA
|
What platform are you using?
Anyway, first, you need to look at the DLH in the message and find out what the reason code is that is in there. This will tell you why the message has been sent to the DLQ. As far as the reply message itself, that really depends on what and who is doing the response. 
_________________
IBM Certified MQSeries Specialist
IBM Certified MQSeries Developer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rextency |
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 2
|
Acutally I download MQ Visual Edit and I had view the reason code wrong. The actual code is 2048, PERSISTANT_MSG_NOT_ALLOWED.
Is there anyway around this if the msg being returned to me is a persistant msg, without changing the code to send a non-persistant msg?
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bbburson |
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 06 Jan 2004
Posts: 378
Location: Nowhere near a queue manager
|
| You'll have to define your dynamic queues as PERMDYN instead of TEMPDYN to be able to accept persistent messages on them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
You really want to change the design:
The reply to a non persistant message should be non persistant and the reply to a persistant msg should be persistant.
In fact there is a number of attributes that need to be pass through for the service:
- persistance
- expiry
- priority
Now the requester should know whether the msg is persistant or not as he is sending it. For persistant messages the reply-to queue should be a predefined (non dynamic) queue.
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| tleichen |
| Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 663
Location: Center of the USA
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
... For persistant messages the reply-to queue should be a predefined (non dynamic) queue.
|
Not necessarily! We did a lot of client-server applications that were sending requests into IMS on a mainframe. For integrity, security, and overall manageability, we used permanent dynamic queues for the response messages. I suspect this scenario may be preferable in some other transaction based systems, as well. We did have to write a permdyn queue cleanup routine, but that was simple. 
_________________
IBM Certified MQSeries Specialist
IBM Certified MQSeries Developer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
