| Author |
Message
|
| hopsala |
 Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 6:44 am Post subject: QPasa - Faults? |
 |
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
Hey,
I've been looking at QPasa as an MQ Monitoring solution. I've heard a lot of good reviews, and the product does indeed look nice and simple (A big plus compared to its competitors).
So my question is, does it have any major disadvantages, glitches, design faults, or missing features that I should be aware of?
The only minor fault is that it doesn't have a high-level view of the QM net, like Tivoli does. But I hear this feature is scheduled to come in the near future.
So help will be appreciated, feel free to voice any gripes or eulogies you wish to make on the product.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20697
Location: LI,NY
|
Been using it for more than 5 years now.
Only positive feed back.
Way easier to set up for Message Broker in terms of triggers and alerts.
Careful when registering the flows... don't register too many at a time. Will have to wait up to 30 mins for feedback to kick in after registering...
Wish they had made the flow kpis in ms and not micro seconds (10 E-6).
Oh and BTW it's called BMC Middleware Performance and Monitoring or something like that now that BMC bought MQSoftware.
Have fun 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
I would prefer QPasa to be an eclipse plug-in, rather than having a completely different look and feel.
Clearly MQ alone can't generate complex alerts or record historic data and all that stuff. So it certainly has value to add. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hopsala |
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Guardian
Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 960
|
| zpat wrote: |
I would prefer QPasa to be an eclipse plug-in, rather than having a completely different look and feel.
Clearly MQ alone can't generate complex alerts or record historic data and all that stuff. So it certainly has value to add. |
I couldn't agree more. I was just talking to the BMC guy about the possibility of integrating the monitoring view into another product. He hasn't gotten back to me yet; if he says something interesting I'll post it here.
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| Oh and BTW it's called BMC Middleware Performance and Monitoring or something like that now that BMC bought MQSoftware. |
Yea, I know, and now there's no eye-catching effect between QNami, QPasa and Appwatch. The product's the same, but now it's less memorable. Perfect marketing. They didn't even try to make the acronym pronouncable - just a string of consonants, why not. Like taking the time and effort to hide your brand of ketchup behind all the other brands on the shelf, in an unappealing gray package, with a label saying "General Purpose Ketchup". 
Btw, would you guys say this product is robust enough for a full-blown site deployment? Let's say, for monitoring >100 QMs?
And while we're at it, from what I've seen the product has one main edges over its competitors: Ease of installation, configuration and deployment (and that's a pretty big edge). Other than that it's made of the standard monitoring stuff. Is there anything else this product does that none of the others do, or do as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20697
Location: LI,NY
|
Don't know how much of a plus it is but the QPasa client also allows you to monitor Databases, WAS, WMB, Weblogic, etc ...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
As a very occasional QPasa user, I find the user interface somewhat non-intuitive.
No doubt if you went on a training course and designed your own rules etc - it would all make a lot more sense.
You should also check out the very good Appwatch product (also from BMC) which is agent-less and browser based. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7716
|
We use QPASA. I refuse to refer to it by the aberration that BMC now calls it (their marketing person should be smacked with a trout).
We have over 150 QMs and thousands of queues in it. I know of other QPASA accounts that dwarf ours. It is definitely an Enterprise worthy MQ monitoring solution.
Their support staff is top notch. I hope BMC doesn't get rid of any of the MQSoftware folks they acquired.
I'd give it a solid A. (A+ if they ever implemented all the various suggestions I've sent in for little enhancements I would like to see - certainly no show stoppers.)
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2010 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20697
Location: LI,NY
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| We use QPASA. I refuse to refer to it by the aberration that BMC now calls it (their marketing person should be smacked with a trout). |
I especially don't want any of their potential customers confusing it with the "knowledge module" for MQ or WMB. 
And I would give it a A too for simplicity in setting up alerts. If you do handle big volumes like Peter, give a holler to their support team and ask for help in scripting... A lot of the tasks done through the UI can also be done through scripting.
Have fun
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| KTalbert |
| Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 08 Aug 2010
Posts: 1
|
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the compliment regarding the Support Team for Q Pasa!. Just an FYI, BMC let me go on Friday as part of a cost cutting measure.
Kent |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
