| Author |
Message
|
| broker_new |
 Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:33 pm Post subject: mqsicreateconfigmgr |
 |
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
Why do we need to create a configuration manager using a derby database, is it possible for using an external or remote database.If not what is the reason behind this...
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| broker_new |
| Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
Sorry even if we create the Derby database using mqsicreatedb and pass it using -n option it doesn't work.....
But read that we should not pass the -n parameters....broker itself internally uses Derby database to maintain the brokers.....
C:\IBM\MQSI\6.1>mqsicreateconfigmgr CFGMGR61 -i db2admin -a db2admin -q WMB62 -n CFGDB
BIP1223I: Attempting to open and migrate DB2 database 'CFGDB'...
BIP1228I: The Configuration Manager repository has been successfully created.
BIP8078E: A problem was encountered while attempting to create/delete the Config
uration Manager.
The operation was not completed successfully.
Check messages in the system log for related errors and retry the operation. If
the problem still occurs, contact your IBM support center.
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
You don't need a database to host a WAS deployment manager... why should you need one to host a Broker configuration manager?
Do not consider that the ConfigMgr uses *any database* at all... Just pretend that it use a "private configuration repository".
You really don't want to worry about having to maintain a full blown database management system and database instance and sets of tables just to run a configmgr that holds a single Broker, do you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqmatt |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 04 Aug 2004
Posts: 1213
Location: Hursley, UK
|
Really old versions of WMB required the Config Manager to have a database.
You should only specify the database parameters on mqsicreateconfigmgr if you are migrating from one of these versions.
For new Config Managers, then as Jeff said, you do not need a database at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| broker_new |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
Thanks for your replies, in past i remember i had a problem in broker database out of synch with the cfgmgr's which will introduce the Ghost or phantom flows not showing in toolkit bit mqsilist does.
I remember we queried the cfgmgr database and deleted the records from it.If we are not using an external DB i think we cannot resolve these type of problems, there are other ways of resolving this problem we may not know other unknown problems.
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| broker_new wrote: |
| I remember we queried the cfgmgr database and deleted the records from it. |
You should have been working on the broker's database.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
You should never need to touch either database.
If things get out sync, you should redeploy things from scratch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bloomy |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 61
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| Quote: |
You don't need a database to host a WAS deployment manager... why should you need one to host a Broker configuration manager?
|
What if in an environment where we have large domains(many brokers and many EG's and many more flows under them) and the derby cannot be configured as per our requirements except increasing the filesystem space where derby db resides.
We have seen many probelms with the repository of the configmgr and the worst thing is we do not a team supporting derby db, but if we could use DB2 or any other databses we could have trouble shooted the problem by ourselves instead of openening a PMR with IBM and waiting for their replies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Stop thinking of it as a database.
Stop thinking of it as "Derby".
If you meddle with it as if it was a database,and fail to resolve some problem, when you DO open a PMR, IBM Support will likely tell you to rebuild the configmgr from scratch.
It's the ConfigMgr's private repository. If you have a large domain, you need diskspace *somewhere* to hold that information. You have at least some control over the disk location where the ConfigMgr will store that repository (-w). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| bloomy wrote: |
| the derby cannot be configured as per our requirements except increasing the filesystem space where derby db resides. |
Define "your requirements". How do these differ from the requirements of the product, given that the database is single-use.
| bloomy wrote: |
| openening a PMR with IBM and waiting for their replies. |
This is exactly what should happen. The product should not break while you are within published limits. If it does, either the publication should be changed or the product fixed.
Granted it's a shame if you're the one that bangs his nose on the problem, but that's true of any problem on any piece of software from any supplier.
How large a domain are we talking here?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bloomy |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 61
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| Quote: |
| How large a domain are we talking here? |
A configmgr with two brokers. Each broker consisting of 50 EG's and 250 flows.
| Quote: |
| The product should not break while you are within published limits. |
I do not want to contradict your statements, but working with broker I never understand the published limits in case of number of flows and EG's that are permittable for a broker or number of brokers per configmgr. Permittable in my sense is healthy without an outage or break of the product. I have read many documents which deal about the capcity planning of the message broker servers and resources needed, I know it is hard for any vendor to publish a document based on the requirements of every customer, but I always feel other products have a more detailed and staright forward approach compared to Message broker when it comes to capacity planning.
It is just an opinion not to balme IBM, capacity should be assesed by the users based on their requirements.
| Quote: |
| Define "your requirements". How do these differ from the requirements of the product, given that the database is single-use. |
I have been seing slow response from the configmgr due to the amount of data present in the repository. Have installed many fixes provided by IBM, we are unable to tune(troubleshoot) the derby DB as we do not have knowledge or tools available to do so. If it was DB2 our database analysts could get the root cause of the problem by running some trace or whatever they do in case of their DB problems.
I know I am kind of taking the discussion out of scope of this problem for which this thread was started.
 Sorry guys if my thinking is wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| broker_new |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
I don't think you are discussing out of scope 
Even we noticed the slowness of configuration manager eventually (WMB v6).
Regulary we face the Phantom(Ghost) message flows.
When we delete the broker from cfgmgr it will not be deleted from repository so we are deleting the references to it using the cfgmgr proxy.
We heard that in WMB v7.0 the cfgmgr will be taken out 
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bloomy |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 11 Feb 2009
Posts: 61
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| Quote: |
| We heard that in WMB v7.0 the cfgmgr will be taken out |
Heard the same, there will be no configmgr in WMB V7.0, we can connect from toolkit to runtime directly without the help of configmgr. 
Hope that will get rid of our current problems with the configmgr, but WMB V7.0 is far to be seen.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
We are dealing with slow Config Managers in WMB 6.1.0.3. Its seems to be related to the # of flows. The more flows, the slower the whole thing is. If I connect my Toolkit to a CM that manages a Broker with 20 EGs and about 400 message flows and sets, it takes about 10 minutes before the TK shows the domain. If I connect to a CM with 20 EGs but less than 10 flows (our Lab), it connects quickly. QA and PROD, identical set ups but without all the flows deployed yet, works OK.
In all cases the CM and Broker are on seperate servers, MQ 6.0.2.5, WMB 6.1.0.3, RHEL 5 on x86-64 bit.
The coorelation I've seen is that when the Toolkit connects, it looks like it creates one message for every flow or set and puts that message into the CM's SYSTEM.BROKER.CONFIG.QUEUE. Then the CM sloooowly starts consuming those messages, taking nearly 100 % CPU. When it finally drains the q, about 10 minutes for 400 flows/sets, your TK opens.
We have a Sev 2 PMR open on this. We are working with them with diagnostic patches to try and get to the root cause. Deploys take a long time. ACL commands take a long time. But on identical systems with very few flows it works fine.
If you are having slow Config Manager problems at WMB 6.1 please open your own PMRs too so this gets the attention it deserves.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| broker_new |
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 614
Location: Washington DC
|
please post the resolution once you fix it that would help us a lot Peter.
_________________
IBM ->Let's build a smarter planet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
