| Author |
Message
|
| linorosa |
 Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:57 am Post subject: Need to keep copy of sent report messages |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 10
|
Can anyone help?
I need to keep a copy of all report messages sent to remote queues. Does anyone knows what's the best way to do this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Apply trout  to management until they back off this requirement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:20 am Post subject: Re: Need to keep copy of sent report messages |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| linorosa wrote: |
| I need to keep a copy of all report messages sent to remote queues. |
For what conceivable purpose? It's bad enough keeping real message received, but why sent report messages? What on earth could they be used for? 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
I guess Management wants to know to whom they acknowledged delivery so that they can know where they still have plausible deniability... [irony] (May be time to switch jobs? [/irony] 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| I guess Management wants to know to whom they acknowledged delivery so that they can know where they still have plausible deniability... [irony] (May be time to switch jobs? [/irony] |
Or time to give them a book on digital certification, non-reputiation and other subjects..... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| linorosa |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 10
|
hehehe. Glad you guys share my opinion.
They've been asking for this for a few months now, and they don't seem like giving up on the issue.
Believe me, I tried to argue but it's no use. Perhaps its because I'm new to mq and don't have good arguments.
The reason behind this is that on one ocasion we consumed a message and sent Coa/Cod to a remote queue. But the receiver claimed he never got these report messages. Now management wants to keep a record of all report messages sent.
I read somewhere that this kind of thing would be acomplished by message exits. You think it's the case? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
The only technical means to meet this requirement is to use an exit.
This is not a simple thing, it's an advanced topic.
The question to ask is: Assume you produce a solution, and now have a copy of every report message. Who is going to consume those reports? For what purpose? Under what circumstances?
Is the intent to merely be able to tell a business partner that, yes, you *did* send a report back to them and if they did not receive it then *they* lost it?
But even having a copy won't prove that. It merely proves that the report message was generated, not that it went where it was supposed to go nor that it did or didn't get there.
Solve whatever business requirement is feeding this technical requirement in a different way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| linorosa wrote: |
| I read somewhere that this kind of thing would be acomplished by message exits. You think it's the case? |
I didn't think you could add a message exit to a remote queue. I don't think you'd want one on a transmission queue. Even if it did prove anything.
The correct solution is not to be using coa/cod messages. They are bad things for exactly the reason you've found - if the report doesn't show up does it prove the original message didn't arrive or that the report got lost?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| linorosa |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 10
|
Actually I succeded in using mirrorq with a remote queue, but it doesn't copies report messages.
If I send a message directely to the remote queue it copies fine. Maybe something to do with the fact that report messages are sent by the MQ and not my application..
As for not using coa/cod, I don't think it's an alternative to us, since we are almost in production. Just out of curiosity, what would be the correct solution if not using coa/cod? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| linorosa wrote: |
| Just out of curiosity, what would be the correct solution if not using coa/cod? |
Realising why you're paying IBM a large amount of money for assured message delivery software - to assure that messages are delivered!
You'll see from the number of discussions on the forum on COD/COA that a number of management / auditor types have a problem with this concept.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| linorosa |
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 10
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
Is the intent to merely be able to tell a business partner that, yes, you *did* send a report back to them and if they did not receive it then *they* lost it?
But even having a copy won't prove that. It merely proves that the report message was generated, not that it went where it was supposed to go nor that it did or didn't get there.
|
Yes, that's the intent. I agree that it won't prove that I sent the report, but if I stored it I could send it again if requested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| linorosa |
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 10
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| linorosa wrote: |
| Just out of curiosity, what would be the correct solution if not using coa/cod? |
Realising why you're paying IBM a large amount of money for assured message delivery software - to assure that messages are delivered!
You'll see from the number of discussions on the forum on COD/COA that a number of management / auditor types have a problem with this concept. |
But then I woudn't know when or if the message was actually consumed in the other end |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
That's a lot of data to track and manage, providing very little value and likely being used very little of the time.
You probably really want a full blown transaction monitoring solution, rather than to rely on things like COA/COD to provide pseudo-tracking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| linorosa wrote: |
| But then I woudn't know when or if the message was actually consumed in the other end |
In a loosely coupled solution (which is what WMQ is used to build) "when" shouldn't be a question; or at least not a question asked by the originating system.
"If" is covered by the assured delivery concept. You can be assured the message was delivered and hence available for consumption.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9472
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
This subject has been discussed here before many times, usually about a well-behaved application. You might want to search on this.
Briefly, a well-behaved request-reply model application will be sensitive to missing (lost) or duplicate requests AND missing or duplicate replies.
Arrival of a message (COA) and delivery of a message (COD) to a consuming application are interesting; but neither affirms that either application successfully processed the message. Or that some messages were lost (not created) and some replies were lost (missing) due to application failures.
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
