| Author |
Message
|
| Lisa |
 Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:41 am Post subject: DEFRESP(ASPARENT) value on MQ v7.0.1.1 |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
All,
I just upgraded from MQ v6.0.7 to MQ v7.0.1.1 and some of my cluster queues contain this value "ASPARENT" in queue attribute DEFRESP. Has anyone seen this issue before?
I'm running on AIX server.
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:47 am Post subject: Re: DEFRESP(ASPARENT) value on MQ v7.0.1.1 |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Lisa wrote: |
| Has anyone seen this issue before? |
What issue?
If you spell it correctly (DEFPRESP) you'll find this attribute explained in the InfoCenter.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lisa |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Why is it an issue? |
It's an issue, because "ASPARENT" is not a valid value.
The value should be SYNC or ASYNC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Show us an example?
Are you sure the object is a QCLUSTER? Does it point to a QLOCAL or a TOPIC?
... Did you just do a stop qmgrs, install v7, start qmgrs? Or did you do something else to migrate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lisa |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:56 am Post subject: Re: DEFRESP(ASPARENT) value on MQ v7.0.1.1 |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| Lisa wrote: |
| Has anyone seen this issue before? |
What issue?
If you spell it correctly (DEFPRESP) you'll find this attribute explained in the InfoCenter. |
I stand corrected. Yes, it should be DEFPRESP. Forgive me for my typo!
And yes, I have already reviewed the InfoCenter searched the web.
I was hoping that someone may have seen this issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lisa |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
Show us an example?
Are you sure the object is a QCLUSTER? Does it point to a QLOCAL or a TOPIC?
... Did you just do a stop qmgrs, install v7, start qmgrs? Or did you do something else to migrate? |
Here is a snap shot of my cluster dump.
AMQ8409: Display Queue details.
QUEUE(xxxx.xxxx.xxxx.APP) TYPE(QCLUSTER)
DEFPRESP(ASPARENT)
AMQ8409: Display Queue details.
QUEUE(xxxx.xxxx.xxxx..SVC) TYPE(QCLUSTER)
DEFPRESP(SYNC) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Lisa wrote: |
| It's an issue, because "ASPARENT" is not a valid value. |
According to this it's valid.
What's complaining about it? What's producing the error message?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lisa |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| Lisa wrote: |
| It's an issue, because "ASPARENT" is not a valid value. |
According to this it's valid.
What's complaining about it? What's producing the error message? |
Thanks Vitor. This link was very useful and I will append this to my PMR.
When viewing messages via MQ Explorer v7; the value comes up as "Unkown". It now appears to be an MQ Explorer issue based on this link.
Thanks again Vito 
Last edited by Lisa on Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Lisa wrote: |
| It now appears to be an MQ Explorer issue. |
Does rather. Please let us know the outcome of the PMR.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
This is triggering some vague memories, but only to the extent of deja vu. The PMR will likely pull up some more relevant facts. I remember something about objects being mispopulated/corrupted during migration, but only under certain specific conditions.
Again, DEFPRESP(ASPARENT) on a QCLUSTER is perfectly acceptable if the base object is a TOPIC and not a QLOCAL. I'm assuming that (XXXX.XXX.XXX.APP) is not a TOPIC, but.
You might pull up some PCF sample code or something and see if you can get back the numeric constant that the object holds. If this is not 0, 1, or 2 (the legal MQPRT_* values), then that's the source of this issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lisa |
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
This is triggering some vague memories, but only to the extent of deja vu. The PMR will likely pull up some more relevant facts. I remember something about objects being mispopulated/corrupted during migration, but only under certain specific conditions.
Again, DEFPRESP(ASPARENT) on a QCLUSTER is perfectly acceptable if the base object is a TOPIC and not a QLOCAL. I'm assuming that (XXXX.XXX.XXX.APP) is not a TOPIC, but.
You might pull up some PCF sample code or something and see if you can get back the numeric constant that the object holds. If this is not 0, 1, or 2 (the legal MQPRT_* values), then that's the source of this issue. |
All,
In my case, this is an issue and IBM has provided test fix patch. The queues in question are NOT TOPICs, but queues.
Thanks, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mvic |
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 2080
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Again, DEFPRESP(ASPARENT) on a QCLUSTER is perfectly acceptable if the base object is a TOPIC and not a QLOCAL. I'm assuming that (XXXX.XXX.XXX.APP) is not a TOPIC, but. |
IMHO, I'm with mqjeff here..
ASPARENT is not a concept applicable to queues (no queue has a "parent" queue), so is not valid as a value in the runmqsc output for a queue.
ASPARENT is a concept applicable to Topic objects, as one node can inherit certain properties from parent Topic objects.
The DEFPRESP attribute is applicable to queues, but ASPARENT does not make sense as a value in that attribute.
Maybe your PMR should take another change of direction? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Lisa |
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Location: NJ
|
| mvic wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Again, DEFPRESP(ASPARENT) on a QCLUSTER is perfectly acceptable if the base object is a TOPIC and not a QLOCAL. I'm assuming that (XXXX.XXX.XXX.APP) is not a TOPIC, but. |
IMHO, I'm with mqjeff here..
ASPARENT is not a concept applicable to queues (no queue has a "parent" queue), so is not valid as a value in the runmqsc output for a queue.
ASPARENT is a concept applicable to Topic objects, as one node can inherit certain properties from parent Topic objects.
The DEFPRESP attribute is applicable to queues, but ASPARENT does not make sense as a value in that attribute.
Maybe your PMR should take another change of direction? |
Maybe you missed my post above yours! As I stated before, ASPARENT is incorrect and IBM has provided me with a fix. For whatever reason, ASPARENT was added to my cluster queues; which we all agree is incorrect.
Thanks, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mvic |
| Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 2080
|
| Lisa wrote: |
| Maybe you missed my post above yours! As I stated before, ASPARENT is incorrect and IBM has provided me with a fix. For whatever reason, ASPARENT was added to my cluster queues; which we all agree is incorrect. |
I misunderstood - I thought you were saying it was an MQ Explorer issue.
Glad it's being fixed...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
