| Author |
Message
|
| AndyMQ |
 Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:18 am Post subject: MQ version 5.1 on Tandem Itanium |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Scotland
|
Is anyone running this version of MQ on the new(ish) Tandem Itanium platform?
Our plans are to upgrade our hardware from S-Series to Itanium (H), without having to go 5.1 to 5.3 first if we can avoid it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:10 am Post subject: Re: MQ version 5.1 on Tandem Itanium |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| AndyMQ wrote: |
| Our plans are to upgrade our hardware from S-Series to Itanium (H), without having to go 5.1 to 5.3 first if we can avoid it. |
I'd have thought upgrading to v5.3 would be more of a priority! 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AndyMQ |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Scotland
|
Sadly, not the way we do things in here!
The hardware upgrade is because we're on the ragged edge in terms of performance, and continually adding inefficient code which is starting to push it over the afforementioned ragged edge.
Moving up to 5.3 on the S-Series is seen as too risky as it also introduces OSS and AutoSync, neither of which is currently used, plus, there's a potential associated increase in memory usage.
The powers-that-be will not sanction moving to Itanium with untried software (i.e. we won't have been able to test 5.3 for the above reasons).
Bit of a Catch22, but if 5.1 won't run on Itanium (nothing in the software setup to suggest that it won't), it may force them to think again....tho' timescales are extremely aggressive.
The other obvious concern is that 5.1 on Tandem goes out of support 30th April next year  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| markt |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knight
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 508
|
| I believe that V5.1 does not run on Itanium. That didn't exist at the time the product was developed. There's nothing in the SOE that implies it does run on Itanium, unlike the SOE for V5.3 which clearly shows two different hardware platforms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hankknowles |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Posts: 114
|
| markt wrote: |
| I believe that V5.1 does not run on Itanium. That didn't exist at the time the product was developed. There's nothing in the SOE that implies it does run on Itanium, unlike the SOE for V5.3 which clearly shows two different hardware platforms. |
I agree that V5.1 probably will not function with the Itanium. V5.3 may be viewed as being a hog with OSS etc but depending how you have the messages set will really dictate how much of a hog it can be.
We have noticed that out utilization has dropped significantly since migrating to V5.3, IBM seems to have ironed out most of the bumps and it's behaving well at this point! The only real issue with the migration is the increased disk space utilized and autosync. We don't have the latter but a work around we use is to pax and send the OSS files nightly to the DR system, in OSS very little changes and we have RDF doing the Guardian side replication of the queues for each qmanager. Maybe you need to push back with the version issue as well possible system utilization decrease from V5.1!
HTH
Good Luck |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AndyMQ |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Scotland
|
Thanks for that. I'd just wondered if anyone had actually tried it.
The support info states K-series and S-series (Dxx and Gxx) but as you said, it was out a long time before Itanium reared its ugly head.
The software itself relies on standard Pathway, TMF, Enscribe, etc... which are all on Itanium. The only place that the processor type comes into play is on the instmqm, and that was never updated to include the later S-series processor types (e.g. S84).
That's what kinda gave me hope that it would run okay on Itanium. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Um.
MQ is a C application. Ergo, the processor comes into play when it's compiled for your platform.
If the Itanium processer is significantly different than the existing processor... and v5.1 isn't compiled for it... you're looking at coredumps and FDCs all over the place.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AndyMQ |
| Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Scotland
|
I know that the version we run on S-Series installs with code 700 objects. They won't run on Itanium as the code type for native is 800.
My not-so-cunning plan had been to run instmqm and choose the non-native install (used to give you the option depending on which processor type you chose). That way we may have got the code 100 object type dumped down, which is runnable on K-Series, S-Series, and Itanium.
Oh well, t'was worth a shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
