| Author |
Message
|
| wraymore |
 Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:45 am Post subject: Building DLH in poison message |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 114
Location: Burlington, NC USA
|
Have a WAS5.1 MDB that determines that a poison message has been read. MQ Support staff wants a DLH added to the message prior to putting the message on a local queue defined to receive failure messages. Is it possible with WAS 5.1?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:04 am Post subject: Re: Building DLH in poison message |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| wraymore wrote: |
| MQ Support staff wants a DLH added to the message prior to putting the message on a local queue defined to receive failure messages. |
That's a very odd thing for MQ Support people to want. The DLH is fairly specific for an undeliverable message rather than a poison one, and is typically reserved for messages going to a dead letter queue, not a failure queue. What's their reasoning on this?
AFAIK WAS will just move the message to the defined backout queue once the threshold is reached. Someone might know if you can vary this behavior.
This site uses an RFH2 header to store failure details of poison & other error messages.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wraymore |
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 114
Location: Burlington, NC USA
|
The MQ Support team is wanting the apps to use a single queue per QM for failures. They chose the DLH so that the apps could record in the message the reason for failure in order for the MQ Support OnCall to not have access to log files to determine whether the message should be replayed or discarded and notify the producer to recreate the message.
However the Java development staff is not finding any documentation on how to achieve this task. So I thought I would try a post here.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| wraymore wrote: |
They chose the DLH so that the apps could record in the message the reason for failure in order for the MQ Support OnCall to not have access to log files to determine whether the message should be replayed or discarded and notify the producer to recreate the message.
|
Fair point.
Here uses an RFH2 because of the space and flexibility the <usr> folder offers. Could use the code in the DLH though; see how that would work.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| wraymore wrote: |
The MQ Support team is wanting the apps to use a single queue per QM for failures. They chose the DLH so that the apps could record in the message the reason for failure in order for the MQ Support OnCall to not have access to log files to determine whether the message should be replayed or discarded and notify the producer to recreate the message.
However the Java development staff is not finding any documentation on how to achieve this task. So I thought I would try a post here. |
This is a task for the MQAdmin.
It states clearly somewhere in the manual that if BOTHRESH is set and there is no backout queue defined the WAS MDB sends the messages to the DLQ. (expect RC 2362)
Now if they want the messages on specific error queues with a DLQ header have them run a DLQ Handler that will do that for them... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wraymore |
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 114
Location: Burlington, NC USA
|
Thank you for your replies.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
