| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Queue MAXMSGL and effect of it |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| zpat |
 Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:16 am Post subject: Queue MAXMSGL and effect of it |
 |
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
QM is z/OS MQ v9.2
The IBM KC says the MAXMSGL on a local queue includes the MQ headers.
However I set the maxmsgl on a local queue to 20 bytes and was able to put a message up to this size.
However with MQMD it would be more like 220 bytes in total.
So is MAXMSGL really the total max size with headers?
_________________
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: Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:13 pm Post subject: Re: Queue MAXMSGL and effect of it |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| zpat wrote: |
QM is z/OS MQ v9.2
The IBM KC says the MAXMSGL on a local queue includes the MQ headers.
However I set the maxmsgl on a local queue to 20 bytes and was able to put a message up to this size.
However with MQMD it would be more like 220 bytes in total.
So is MAXMSGL really the total max size with headers? |
Possibly without the MQ header but with any of the properties headers, RFH2 etc... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hughson |
| Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2022 1:28 am Post subject: Re: Queue MAXMSGL and effect of it |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 09 May 2013
Posts: 1959
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
|
| zpat wrote: |
| The IBM KC says the MAXMSGL on a local queue includes the MQ headers. |
It is probably referring to headers such as MQDLH, or MQXQH or other MQ headers that are part of the message body, rather than the Message Descriptor.
Cheers,
Morag
_________________
Morag Hughson @MoragHughson
IBM MQ Technical Education Specialist
Get your IBM MQ training here!
MQGem Software |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2022 11:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
Thanks, it would seem that you are correct.
We need to be careful when (if) using AMS - as that will certainly add to the message length.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| hughson |
| Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2022 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 09 May 2013
Posts: 1959
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
|
| zpat wrote: |
| We need to be careful when (if) using AMS - as that will certainly add to the message length. |
That is most certainly true.
This presentation from 2017 suggests the following calculation:
| IBM MQ Security: Deep dive including AMS wrote: |
Message size- To accommodate AMS properties, overall message size will increase.
- New message size = 1280 + [Old Message Length] + (200 x [# of recipients])
|
Cheers,
Morag
_________________
Morag Hughson @MoragHughson
IBM MQ Technical Education Specialist
Get your IBM MQ training here!
MQGem Software |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
