| Author |
Message
|
| jeevan |
 Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:34 pm Post subject: History of MQ |
 |
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
I was looking for a historical development of MQ. I came across a few websites ( one from MQseries.net) url that talks about how MQseries or Websphere MQ came into being. However, there are a few conflicting things
These are my finding
1.
1992-3 - State Street Bank (Boston) evaluates IBM messaging product (code name “Victory”) for IBM CICS/ESA and SSI’s ezBridge on VMS and Tandem.
“State Street Bank would like to announce the wedding of
IBM and Systems Strategies!”
www.cs.nyu.edu/courses/fall05/G22.2631-001/conron.doc
2.
However, I found this following in MQseries.net
MQM MVS/ESA V1.1 GA (MVS)- December 31, 1993
ezBridge Transact for MQSeries - March, Sept, Nov, Dec 1993
http://www.mqseries.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=227339
From the first, I could not draw any conclusion about the relationship between ezBridge and MQM
Also, the first doc says, IBM announced the 3 APIs. but the second says, IBM announced the MQM.
I would be grateful if anyone could clarify this.
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| PaulClarke |
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: New Zealand
|
I would have thought the summary written by Dermot Flaherty, in the link you give, sums it up rather well. What bit are you unclear about ? Essentially SSI wrote some of the first Distributed MQ Products (known as the version 1 products) mainly on platforms that we in Hursley had little or no knowledge of at the time. We concentrated on the IBM platforms and they did things like DEC and Tandem. Their Version 1 products were an adaption of their EZBridge product. Whereas the Version 2 Hursley products were written from scratch as MQ (and MQI) based products.
Does that help at all?
Paul.
_________________
Paul Clarke
MQGem Software
www.mqgem.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
I would have thought the summary written by Dermot Flaherty, in the link you give, sums it up rather well. What bit are you unclear about ? Essentially SSI wrote some of the first Distributed MQ Products (known as the version 1 products) mainly on platforms that we in Hursley had little or no knowledge of at the time. We concentrated on the IBM platforms and they did things like DEC and Tandem. Their Version 1 products were an adaption of their EZBridge product. Whereas the Version 2 Hursley products were written from scratch as MQ (and MQI) based products.
Does that help at all?
Paul. |
Definitely. Previously I was not sure( still have something unclear) but now much better.
Here is what I understood
EBride and imb product were similar in nature but for different platform
state back uses both as they have both platforms, ibm and non ibm.
Then IBM realised the value of EBridge and bought IP and merge a single product. this is how mq was born. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PaulClarke |
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: New Zealand
|
Well, that's not quite how I remember it. Of course the early 90's was a long time ago now so my memory could well be 'iffy'. However, the sequence of events that I remember was:
1/ IBM develops MQ on z/OS primarily for one or two major customers.
2/ During development IBM recognises that MQ would be more useful if available on as many platforms as possible.
3/ The Distributed team in Hursley is established (which included myself) to write versions on OS/2, AIX and AS/400.
4/ The cross platform concepts of MQ are architected. For example I was involved in the Formats and Protocols developed to transfer messages between Queue Managers. One of my very few claims to fame is that my name appears, alongside some much cleverer people, on the original MQSeries Formats and Protocols patent.
5/ IBM realises that adding non-IBM platforms to the range of MQ would be extremely useful to many customers. However, the Hursley team has little or no knowledge of platforms like DEC and Tandem.
6/ IBM looks around for a company who were doing something 'similar' to MQ and discovered EzBridge which was a message based product which could communicate across platform. There were significant limitations in the EzBridge product (my recollection is that it didn't support transactions but I could be wrong) but it was close enough that it could be altered to present the same externals and MQSeries.
7/ IBM subcontracted SSI to build the version 1 products of MQSeries on the non-IBM platforms (and, oddly, an earlier version of AS/400)
8/ Around 1993, within a relatively short space of time IBM releases MQSeries products for z/OS, OS/2, AIX, AS/400 which were written in Hursley and also SSI MQSeries (Version 1) products, which were based on EZBridge, for DEC, Tandem and AS/400. As far as I know this is the first time an IBM software product is available on any non-IBM hardware.
So, just to re-iterate the Hursley MQ products (and therefore the ones in use today) were not based on EzBridge and used no IP or code from it. We did use certain bits of technology from other products, for example the logger was originally borrowed from DB/2 and then modified, but I'm not aware of use using anything from EzBridge.
Anyway, I hope that makes it a little clearer. As I said earlier, my memory could be hazy in certain areas so if anyone has a different recollection then by all means chip in.
Cheers,
paul.
_________________
Paul Clarke
MQGem Software
www.mqgem.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
Well, that's not quite how I remember it. Of course the early 90's was a long time ago now so my memory could well be 'iffy'. However, the sequence of events that I remember was:
1/ IBM develops MQ on z/OS primarily for one or two major customers.
2/ During development IBM recognises that MQ would be more useful if available on as many platforms as possible.
3/ The Distributed team in Hursley is established (which included myself) to write versions on OS/2, AIX and AS/400.
4/ The cross platform concepts of MQ are architected. For example I was involved in the Formats and Protocols developed to transfer messages between Queue Managers. One of my very few claims to fame is that my name appears, alongside some much cleverer people, on the original MQSeries Formats and Protocols patent.
5/ IBM realises that adding non-IBM platforms to the range of MQ would be extremely useful to many customers. However, the Hursley team has little or no knowledge of platforms like DEC and Tandem.
6/ IBM looks around for a company who were doing something 'similar' to MQ and discovered EzBridge which was a message based product which could communicate across platform. There were significant limitations in the EzBridge product (my recollection is that it didn't support transactions but I could be wrong) but it was close enough that it could be altered to present the same externals and MQSeries.
7/ IBM subcontracted SSI to build the version 1 products of MQSeries on the non-IBM platforms (and, oddly, an earlier version of AS/400)
8/ Around 1993, within a relatively short space of time IBM releases MQSeries products for z/OS, OS/2, AIX, AS/400 which were written in Hursley and also SSI MQSeries (Version 1) products, which were based on EZBridge, for DEC, Tandem and AS/400. As far as I know this is the first time an IBM software product is available on any non-IBM hardware.
So, just to re-iterate the Hursley MQ products (and therefore the ones in use today) were not based on EzBridge and used no IP or code from it. We did use certain bits of technology from other products, for example the logger was originally borrowed from DB/2 and then modified, but I'm not aware of use using anything from EzBridge.
Anyway, I hope that makes it a little clearer. As I said earlier, my memory could be hazy in certain areas so if anyone has a different recollection then by all means chip in.
Cheers,
paul. |
Thanks a lot. Yes, this is more clear. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PaulClarke |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: New Zealand
|
Thanks....I'll try to remember. My apologies if my posts appear jumbled to anyone. Part of the problem is that I often write my posts in something more 'friendly' like a Word Processor and then copy/paste the result into the text box on MQSeries.net. I never understand why so many Web based utilities give you such a small box to write text into. As I type this now the text box is less than a quarter of the width of my screen!
_________________
Paul Clarke
MQGem Software
www.mqgem.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
| As I type this now the text box is less than a quarter of the width of my screen! |
Size doesn't matter. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PaulClarke |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: New Zealand
|
No, not if you only type three words 
_________________
Paul Clarke
MQGem Software
www.mqgem.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
| As I type this now the text box is less than a quarter of the width of my screen! |
but it probably still holds more characters than you can put on a 3270 or vt-100 screen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PaulClarke |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: New Zealand
|
I'm not quite sure what you are saying. Are you arguing that the bulletin board has been designed for use by a 3270 terminal?!! Do we not feel that the world has moved on slightly from there?
_________________
Paul Clarke
MQGem Software
www.mqgem.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
| I'm not quite sure what you are saying. Are you arguing that the bulletin board has been designed for use by a 3270 terminal?!! Do we not feel that the world has moved on slightly from there? |
No, I'm saying that the little text box you're complaining about has more function than an entire 3270 terminal, which I *hope* means we have moved on slightly from there.
Despite every single zOS admin I've ever known being continually enthralled with using ISPF on a green screen.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
| No, not if you only type three words |
We are talking of Vitor here aren't we? 
...now quietly slinking off having stupidly put my head above the parapet...
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PaulClarke |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 1002
Location: New Zealand
|
I'm not complaining about the functionality of the text box, no doubt it's really really clever. My complaint is merely that it is tiny. When the first word processors came out in the 70's and 80's the designers, even then, had the good sense to make them the width of the screen. Here we are, 40 years later, with systems capable of displaying millions of pixels typing in to tiny boxes. I guess I just don't understand why, but it certainly doesn't feel like progress to me.
_________________
Paul Clarke
MQGem Software
www.mqgem.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
| PaulClarke wrote: |
| I'm not complaining about the functionality of the text box, no doubt it's really really clever. My complaint is merely that it is tiny. When the first word processors came out in the 70's and 80's the designers, even then, had the good sense to make them the width of the screen. Here we are, 40 years later, with systems capable of displaying millions of pixels typing in to tiny boxes. I guess I just don't understand why, but it certainly doesn't feel like progress to me. |
It depends how we intepret the word "progress". If someone inteprets it as changes, then we are progressing. If we intepret it in term of " what we like the progress mean to us" then probably not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
