| Would you like to have this enhancement |
| yes |
|
100% |
[ 4 ] |
| no |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Don't particularly care either way |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 4 |
|
| Author |
Message
|
| fjb_saper |
 Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:33 am Post subject: MS03 enhancement request |
 |
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Dear Santa,
When using the -1 option the output is different from the previous run only if something changed. This is true for the MQ definitions but is not true for the authorizations. Can we please have this option apply to the authorizations too?
Thank you very much
P.S. (I was nice all year round)  
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Please forward this request to me in email, so I can add it to the list of possible enhancements for the next release.
This holds true for ms03, ms0s and ma7k.
Notice that this implies nothing about whether I will include this, or when the next release will come out.
It won't be in time for christmas of this year, that's for sure...
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
email sent
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 10:48 am Post subject: Re: MS03 enhancement request |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| When using the -1 option the output is different from the previous run only if something changed. This is true for the MQ definitions but is not true for the authorizations. |
Can you please elaborate?
AFAIK with -1 everything is put on one line, do you mean the security output with -1 is not on one line?
MS03 itself does no diffing AFAIK (last version I used is 6.0.3)
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Hi Michael
If you check the output of MS03 into svn you will notice that -1 does not litterally mean one line but that the lines that cause a diff without change to the definition have been suppressed. As such the utility svn does a diff and only checks in files for qmgr where the objects have effectively been changed...
This is not the case with the auth file which gets checked in every time...
Enjoy
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
But that's SVN, and not MS03.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| But that's SVN, and not MS03. |
that's my idea too 
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
So, likely, the difference is that saveqmgr makes requests for different types of MQSC objects in a certain order, and then outputs them in that certain order. So the MQSC file is always "sorted" in a structured way that diff can meaningfully deal with.
But the individual authorizations are returned to saveqmgr in whatever order the command server gives them, and output to the file in that same order.
I'm guessing that these do not come out in the same order every time. Although, knowing that they're built from the messages on SYSTEM.AUTH.DATA.QUEUE, I'm a bit surprised at that.
Also, are you using -z or -Z? I just ran a test myself, running with -Z twice against the same qmgr (renaming the default auth file name inbetween). The two files came out *exactly* the same, from a diff.
Repeating the same test with -z, the only difference was (hopefully obviously), the header line.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Not sure I'll have to check if I'm using -z or -Z...
I believe the date timestamp is in the output file 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| I believe the date timestamp is in the output file |
It is with -z, and not with -Z... 
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
I thought I had -Z... upon checking I just realized I had -z....
Not so apparent due to font rendering ...
Thanks Jeff for setting me straight. 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
