| Author |
Message
|
| danhoffman |
 Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:37 am Post subject: ImqQueue's currentDepth() returns false sometimes |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 25
|
Hi,
I have an app that gets the current depth of all the queues, alerts, etc. I'm finding that there are certain queues that sometimes return false on this function call and sometimes return true. I'm wondering it happens when an application connects and gets the queue in exclusive mode, but I'm not sure. How do I find out since I only get a true/false rather than an MQ code? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Why is your app looking for current depth? What's the requirement? Why does it care?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| danhoffman |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:53 am Post subject: currentDepth |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 25
|
| It dumps the queue depth of multiple queues from multiple queue managers to a csv file for analysis over time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:59 am Post subject: Re: currentDepth |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| danhoffman wrote: |
| It dumps the queue depth of multiple queues from multiple queue managers to a csv file for analysis over time. |
a) use depth events
b) buy a monitoring package that does this
This wheel has already been invented and is nice and circular.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| danhoffman |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:01 am Post subject: currentDepth |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 25
|
| While your suggestions may be valid, there is a specific function available in the API that provides the information I seek. I'm having trouble with using this function in the API. This forum is to discuss that API- I was hoping to receive more useful information than what you've provided. If I am to buy a package for every task, then why is a public api available? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
It may be better to use PCFs rather than INQUIRE.
Are you sure the queues that are returning false are valid to have queue depth?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| danhoffman |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 25
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
It may be better to use PCFs rather than INQUIRE.
Are you sure the queues that are returning false are valid to have queue depth? |
jeff,
I ordinarily would be using PCF (and do against queue managers on Unix, etc.), but I'm connecting to a mainframe queue manager and I believe that PCF is not supported. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). The queues in question sometimes return false, and sometimes return true with a valid depth. Therefore the queues themselves are valid for queue depth, but there may be intermittent conditions that prevent me from getting the depth. (And that's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of).
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:07 am Post subject: Re: currentDepth |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| danhoffman wrote: |
| If I am to buy a package for every task, then why is a public api available? |
a) The API is also used by the monitoring software
b) I never said a package for every task
c) In my innocence I thought the opinion that the total cost of ownership presented by a hand-rolled monitoring solution would be larger than that of a commercial solution, especially when not leveraging the facilities provided by the software, might be useful / interesting / valuable. I apologise for any offence caused.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
To respond directly to your question, if you're using administrative functions you're better off with PCF commands.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| danhoffman |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Nov 2005
Posts: 25
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| To respond directly to your question, if you're using administrative functions you're better off with PCF commands. |
I'm told that it doesn't work against a mainframe queue manager. Is that correct? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Mainframe qmgrs at v6 support PCF.
Mainframe qmgrs pre-v6 support plain MQSC on the command server input queue.
It may be worth comparing the results of the same INQUIRE from the plain C API, with the C++ API.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bower5932 |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Aug 2001
Posts: 3023
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
|
| danhoffman wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| To respond directly to your question, if you're using administrative functions you're better off with PCF commands. |
I'm told that it doesn't work against a mainframe queue manager. Is that correct? |
I thought they worked in WMQ v6.0 on the mainframe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| danhoffman wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| To respond directly to your question, if you're using administrative functions you're better off with PCF commands. |
I'm told that it doesn't work against a mainframe queue manager. Is that correct? |
Not on v6, and AFAIK you can submit commands against v5.n queue managers.
I commend the "Monitoring MQ" manual to your attention, along with the platform specific System Administration ones.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
