| Author |
Message
|
| Vitor |
 Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:04 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| The Database concept is interesting as it makes it easy to see what all the setting are, and easy to make changes. Of course now you are dependent on that database on flow deploy or flow / EG / Broker restart time. |
It was principally for this reason we decided against this method. I'm not saying it's a bad method, just offering an alternative viewpoint.
The other "advantage" we find from this is that all of the application configuration is centralized in a single location (the source code repository) and the text is easily interrogated by Support people with limited tools or training.
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| I've also heard of people using queues to hold these kind of details, the idea being change the message in the "config" queue if you want to change what the flow does. |
A queue as a database? Burn them! Burn them!
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| zpat |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
Tell that to IBM with reference to MQ authorization and cluster information.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
[quote="Vitor"]
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
The other "advantage" we find from this is that all of the application configuration is centralized in a single location (the source code repository) and the text is easily interrogated by Support people with limited tools or training.
|
Nothing to stop you from putting the SQL that sets the DB values into source control.
If fact we put the master copies of all those files in the Broker Project so they are there in Source control anyway. If you create a folder called "Docs&Testing" and put them under that even files with a .xml extension don't get put into BAR files but they are put into source control.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| zpat wrote: |
| Tell that to IBM with reference to MQ authorization and cluster information. |
Been there, done that.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| Nothing to stop you from putting the SQL that sets the DB values into source control. |
And nothing to stop anyone with a urgent requirement and a DBA's phone number from changing them.
I accept the point, and again I'm not saying this is a bad method, or that we didn't consider it. I'm just saying that in our opinion and given the situation on this site we decided against it.
If you've got it working well for you, then I say yay.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| joebuckeye |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 364
Location: Columbus, OH
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| The other "advantage" we find from this is that all of the application configuration is centralized in a single location (the source code repository) and the text is easily interrogated by Support people with limited tools or training. |
This is the main reason we went with bar file overrides. Support staff can update a properties file and prepare the bar file for deployment without involving a developer.
And using broker name to determine what environment you are in can make it difficult to test alternative configs (ie run the TEST config in QA due to issue X). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| zpat wrote: |
| Tell that to IBM with reference to MQ authorization and cluster information. |
Been there, done that. |
I would hate to need a database to run MQ. Keep it simple.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| zpat wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| zpat wrote: |
| Tell that to IBM with reference to MQ authorization and cluster information. |
Been there, done that. |
I would hate to need a database to run MQ. Keep it simple. |
Recent versions of IIB store security information in the file system, to remove the dependency on MQ. MQ itself could exploit this technology.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2017 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5849
Location: UK
|
Recent versions of IIB also (thankfully) have the option to retain their authorization rules in MQ profiles where they are more flexible.
Of course MQ could use files, but files are crude, easy to corrupt, hard to synchronise automatically and so on.
Let's not head back to the 1970's by using files.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| zpat wrote: |
Recent versions of IIB also (thankfully) have the option to retain their authorization rules in MQ profiles where they are more flexible.
Of course MQ could use files, but files are crude, easy to corrupt, hard to synchronise automatically and so on.
Let's not head back to the 1970's by using files. |
We're heading  and I support your right to an opinion, but I respectfully disagree. The file based registry is robust, fits nicely into our HA strategy and allows us to decouple IIB from MQ.
Please notice the use of "our" & "us". I repeat my belief that you may do as you feel is best, and that MQ remains a viable & supported storage solution that fits a number of use cases.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
