| Author |
Message
|
| trifo |
 Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:58 am Post subject: Determining actual values of MaxChannels and MaxActiveChanns |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 26
|
Hi All,
I have problems using an MQ server (ver 5.1): sometimes it is running out of channel slots.
I have set a quite high value for either MaxChannels and MaxAciveChannels, but it seems that my settings somehow do not apply:
=====
CHANNELS:
MaxChannels=300
MaxActiveChannels=300
=====
Anyhow, after restarting the qmanager, the number of channels tops at 150 and then I get errors of 2009 (Maximum number of channels reached).
Now I have two questions:
1) Is there a way to determine the actual running values of the above parameters?
2) Is there any grammatical rule which might be broken in my config file (I mean case sensitive keywords, sensitivity of number ot type of whitespaces in the beginning of lines, disallowance of empty lines along the file, need of empty line at the end of file, on any other)
Thanks in advance,
--Trifo |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:18 am Post subject: Re: Determining actual values of MaxChannels and MaxActiveCh |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| trifo wrote: |
| I have problems using an MQ server (ver 5.1): sometimes it is running out of channel slots. |
If this is on a standard distributed platform I'm amazed it's still running!! 
(Mentioning the platform would have helped us help you)
| trifo wrote: |
I have set a quite high value for either MaxChannels and MaxAciveChannels, but it seems that my settings somehow do not apply:
=====
CHANNELS:
MaxChannels=300
MaxActiveChannels=300
=====
|
I've seen larger values. MaxActiveChannels is only honoured on z/OS
| trifo wrote: |
1) Is there a way to determine the actual running values of the above parameters?
|
You mean what the queue manager is using as values? No.
| trifo wrote: |
2) Is there any grammatical rule which might be broken in my config file (I mean case sensitive keywords, sensitivity of number ot type of whitespaces in the beginning of lines, disallowance of empty lines along the file, need of empty line at the end of file, on any other)
|
They're case sensitive, spelt as you have them.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
MaxActiveChannels is used outside of z/OS.
It may not be valid for MQ v5.1.
Using MQ v5.1 on any platform is invalid.
Imagine that there is an emoticon here, that resembles a dinosaur.
Nothing you try to do with v5.1 to make it adjust to a modern load is worth your time and trouble. The only maintanence/administration step that will provide any business value is to upgrade to v6.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trifo |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 26
|
Hi,
Thanks for the fast reply!
I've forgot to mention the platform: it is AIX 4.3. Yes, it is quite an oldtimer setup, but for now we have no opportunity to move forward in releases. It has been running for years without a single touch, but needs has been changed now.
The mentioed "highness" of values is relative. It is much more than we would need (some below 200).
Then, is there any way to VALIDATE a config file before putting it in the production environement?
--Trifo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| trifo wrote: |
| It has been running for years without a single touch, but needs has been changed now. |
The change you need to make is to upgrade to v6. The v5.1 is so old it's not even funny.
| trifo wrote: |
| The mentioed "highness" of values is relative. It is much more than we would need (some below 200). |
But more than 150 clearly. Given the age of the system are you sure it has the resources to support more than 150 connections, assuming the queue manager is attempting them? Are you sure the 2009 is not the result of a system limitation rather than a queue manager limit?
| trifo wrote: |
Then, is there any way to VALIDATE a config file before putting it in the production environement?
|
Use it on a test queue manager. If it starts it's a valid file.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
MaxActiveChannels is used outside of z/OS.
|
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Obviously the people in charge of your setup have no concept of business risk.
Past success is no guarantee of future performance.
The minute this system fails in any way, there is no way to fix it. You can not get any support from IBM, on either the queue manager or the AIX release!
If they change the oil in their automobiles ever, they should apply maintenance to MQ.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trifo |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 26
|
I know well, that this thing has no support in any ways. I know it well. Now it is a temporary situation which has to be survived somehow. Thi means a couple of months.
OS limitations may apply, but this host served for 6 quite busy queue managers and now the half of it has been moved. So I do not think that the host would fing it too hard to serve the needed number of connections. The MQ I suck with is nailed here because its parameters and network situation is hardcoded in some software which is not subject to change until the end of theyr life. They will end in a couple of months.
Anyhow, if it is some limitation outside of the MQ itself, what can it be? Do you have some ideas to discover?
--Trifo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Your best bet is to see if you can dig up the v5.1 documents, and find out if MaxActiveChannels is supported, or otherwise how to do this.
I certainly don't remember and don't remember how to do this.
You might also simply be running out of system resources to start additional channels, even if MQ would let you.
Ideally, there would be messages in the AMQERR logs to indicate something about this, above and beyond the client errors.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trifo |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 26
|
As for the OS, there is free memory, there is CPU idle time, there is not much IO wait. There were a heap of channels on this hos - in othe QM-s - which runs elsewhere now. So I think OS limit should not apply.
Anyhow I have some ideas to try, most of them spell related. For example I've eliminated empty lines from the config and changed the begonnong of channels stanza from "Channels:" to "CHANNELS:"
(Hope dies at last...)
--Trifo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| trifo wrote: |
Anyhow I have some ideas to try, most of them spell related. For example I've eliminated empty lines from the config and changed the begonnong of channels stanza from "Channels:" to "CHANNELS:"
(Hope dies at last...)
|
Put flowers on the grave.
Another possibility is you've found a bug in the v5.1 software; has the box been bounced since the old queue managers were moved off? Maybe there are still some semaphores / shared memory still being held?
Tell your management this is what they get for being on unsupported software; see if this advances the upgrade. Also ask what exactly about MQ v5.1 is hardcoded and where exactly it's hardcoded. I struggle to see what information this would be, and wonder if this is just another example of the "we can't change it in case the magic goes away" excuse.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| trifo wrote: |
I know well, that this thing has no support in any ways. I know it well. Now it is a temporary situation which has to be survived somehow. Thi means a couple of months.
OS limitations may apply, but this host served for 6 quite busy queue managers and now the half of it has been moved. So I do not think that the host would fing it too hard to serve the needed number of connections. The MQ I suck with is nailed here because its parameters and network situation is hardcoded in some software which is not subject to change until the end of theyr life. They will end in a couple of months.
Anyhow, if it is some limitation outside of the MQ itself, what can it be? Do you have some ideas to discover?
--Trifo |
You do realize that it does not take effect until the qmgr is restarted. Which is no garantee that it will restart ever in your environment... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trifo |
| Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 26
|
Vitor: The hardcoded stuff contains network related information, not MQ version related. It is a client program written in Delphi. The source code and the development resources are not available. And yes, it sucks.
fjb_saper: Yes, I know I have to restart the QM, also I did. The problems rised around _stopping_ the QM, the start was seamless. Anyways, the box itself was not rebooted, and might be in a strange state regarding the shared memory and semaphores.
--Trifo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| trifo wrote: |
| Vitor: The hardcoded stuff contains network related information, not MQ version related. It is a client program written in Delphi. The source code and the development resources are not available. And yes, it sucks. |
Then there is no reason MQ can't be updated. This is the point of having MQ, to abtract the transport layer from the application.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| trifo |
| Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 26
|
Yeah, no reason, except for licensing.
--Trifo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
