| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Batch files handling Message Broker Vs IBM Sterling |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| deepuu |
 Posted: Sat May 17, 2014 9:02 pm Post subject: Batch files handling Message Broker Vs IBM Sterling |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 8
|
Currently we do online processing for files in Message Broker. But there is this new requirement for batch files, aprox. 1 MB as of now and size might increase later and have IBM sterling do all the batch files and online files in Message Broker. I am comfortable with this file size in WMB, but someone is trying to push Sterling for batch.Any idea on pros and cons of batch in each for processing ans which one do i use
Thanks in advance |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| zpat |
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2014 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
1 MB seems pretty small.
If you are generating messages per file record - you might want to consider the syncpoint limit on the queue manager.
_________________
Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2014 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| zpat wrote: |
1 MB seems pretty small.
If you are generating messages per file record - you might want to consider the syncpoint limit on the queue manager. |
You mean syncpoint limit AND corresponding log file space size yes? 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2014 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
Yes, I suppose it depends on the record size.
I've seen message flows blow the 10k (default) syncpoint limit. I've never had one use all my log space yet but of course it is possible.
The 1 mb size suggests small records.
_________________
Well, I don't think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
