| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| the phrase "if you have the CAF" explained |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| ivanachukapawn |
 Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 2:54 pm Post subject: the phrase "if you have the CAF" explained |
 |
|
Knight
Joined: 27 Oct 2003
Posts: 561
|
Searching MQSeries.net for topics related to client connectivity to Z/OS Queue managers, I have found the phrase "if you have the CAF" multiple times (by different authors).
Generally speaking, industry-wide would you expect the CAF to be in the Z/OS MQ environment? Is it usually there? Is it the exception? Are there strong arguments against having the CAF installed? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:21 pm Post subject: Re: the phrase "if you have the CAF" explained |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| ivanachukapawn wrote: |
Searching MQSeries.net for topics related to client connectivity to Z/OS Queue managers, I have found the phrase "if you have the CAF" multiple times (by different authors).
Generally speaking, industry-wide would you expect the CAF to be in the Z/OS MQ environment? Is it usually there? Is it the exception? Are there strong arguments against having the CAF installed? |
The strongest argument against it is cost:
you can have distributed qmgrs act as concentrator and talk qmgr to qmgr to ZOS.
Arguments for it are speed and instant reply: If you cannot attach to the CAF you get a return code and know it in your app. If you are attached to a distributed qmgr acting as concentrator and the channel goes down you don't know about it. All you do as an app is timeout...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guest
|
"The strongest argument against it is cost"
A variety of license options are available for MQ, CAF, and other z/OS products and features. To have another qmgr on another platform (with the attendant system administration, network flows, and potential glitches) to act as an intermediary qmgr in order to shield you from a possible one-time license charge, doesn't seem to make business sense to me.
Given that a single mainframe can host hundreds of qmgr instances, with tens of thousands of concurrent users, "return on investment" or "cost-per-user over time" seem to be better business metrics than just "cost".
I've watched many companies get off the mainframe "to save money," only to double or tripple their aggreagte cost of computing.
Search for and read: "dinosaur myth- an update" at www.arcati.com/dinomyth.pdf |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
