Mohammad Ali | 27 May 09:22 2016
Picon

Lighthouse for IBM MQ v2

Hi All,

I would normally avoid posting commercial messages on this forum.
However, on this occasion our team is giving something to the community for free so I hope this isn't annoying!

In case you don't know...

Lighthouse is a web based messaging systems management tool.
It is produced in Sydney, Australia by a bunch of highly knowledgeable, dedicated and experienced integration engineers with loads of experience across a number of industries, particularly banking.
Our goal is to produce a product which distills everything we wished we could buy from a vendor whilst running IBM MQ, Solace and ActiveMQ at our old gigs.

In a nutshell, you get the following functions with Lighthouse:

- Secured queue browsing with a simple but powerful permissions system optimised for granting access to non administrators such as operations, config and developer teams
- Automated configuration deployment with secured approval workflow
- Configuration backup and diff (compare config LIVE)
- Sophisticated monitoring and analytics (through Elasticsearch)

We offer all of the above in a neat little web and monitoring package with support for IBM MQ, Solace and ActiveMQ.
We focus on messaging systems so we deliver a more complete and relevant feature set. Lighthouse is the ONLY product that has this combination of functionality.

Lighthouse v2 brings the following new features:

- ActiveMQ support
- Integration with chat systems such as Slack, HipChat, Yammer, etc. This is so you can have fresh alert messages delivered directly to your chat room
- Environment live diff
- Message content download
- Loads of internal improvements in areas of performance and robustness

The FREE part of all the above is that you can now and download and use Lighthouse for FREE FOREVER. You will be limited to managing only a few brokers/queue managers/devices and of course our level of support is best effort. Our paid tiers are very affordable starting from as low as $170 USD per month with proper support.


(Mo) Mohammad Ali
LightApps Pty Ltd

LightApps - Creators of Lighthouse software.
Modern web based management of messaging systems IBM MQ, Solace and ActiveMQ
Secured queue browsing, automated configuration deployment, configuration backup and sophisticated monitoring. 

List Archive - Manage Your List Settings - Unsubscribe

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com

Paul Meekin | 26 May 17:26 2016

Multiple RCVR Channel instances and seq numbers

Hi all,

This is probably a blast from the past but my memory is starting to fade
and I've not been able to dig out an answer.

When you have multiple SDR channels pointing to a single RCVR channel in a
non-clustered environment how does the receiving QMgr keep track of all the
different sequence numbers? I recall it used to use a combination of
Channel Name and remote IP address to identify a unique instance but I
think that was changed at some point.

Anyone know what it uses now? Is it QMgr Id or something else perhaps?

Cheers,
Paul

************************************************************
HSBC Bank plc
Registered Office: 8 Canada Square, London E14 5HQ
Registered in England - Number 14259
Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the
Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority
************************************************************

-----------------------------------------
SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT!

This E-mail is confidential.  

It may also be legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you may not copy,
forward, disclose or use any part of it. If you have received this message in error,
please delete it and all copies from your system and notify the sender immediately by
return E-mail.

Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be timely secure, error or virus-free.
The sender does not accept liability for any errors or omissions.

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES
Costa, D. (Damian | 26 May 11:31 2016
Picon

stopping & deleting a qmgr in M2000 MQ Appliance

Hi all,
 Got  a problem with a POC appliance. The qmgr I was testing with need to be removed before the Appliance is
taken back by IBM. However I cannot delete the qmgr.

M2000(mqcli)# dltmqm YADA.YADA 
AMQ8041: The queue manager cannot be restarted or deleted because processes,
that were previously connected, are still running.
Process 10695 is still running.
Process 10815 is still running.
AMQ7018: The queue manager operation cannot be completed.

Is there a way I can delete those two processes individually?

********************
Nedbank Limited Reg No 1951/000009/06. The following link displays
the names of the Nedbank Board of Directors and Company Secretary.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/DirectorsNedbank.htm ]
This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only.
The following link will take you to Nedbank's legal notice.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/EmailDisclaimer.htm ]
********************

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES
Larry Parsons - IT | 25 May 16:04 2016

MFT Client

Pre MQ v7.5 there was a FTE Client Agent install option that was marketed at a reduced price from the Server Agent install.  Is the reduced cost client agent an option for version 7.5 and version 8?


List Archive - Manage Your List Settings - Unsubscribe

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com

Coombs, Lawrence | 25 May 04:20 2016

Re: A clustering puzzle..

Background:

I have one application that was connecting directly to two queue managers C(FR) and D(FR) and putting
messages to a local queue that resided on both queue managers.

Low and behold, they wanted the messages to be load balanced across both queue managers. So instead of
connecting directly to C and D, the application now connects to queue managers A and B. 

Now A(PR), B(PR), C(FR) and D(FR) are in the same cluster. So someone created a cluster alias on C and D that
resolved to the local queue on C and D.

The assumption was that the messages would be load balanced between C and D. Well, they are now complaining
that C is getting up to three to four times more messages than D.   I am now trying to figure out why. The only
thing I can see that is abnormal, is that there are three manually defined cluster sender channels from A to
C. There is only one manually defined cluster sender channel from B to D.

I am going to clean up these extra cluster sender channels and the cluster. I am just trying to get some folks
off my back.

This is the only reason I can think of. Am I correct?

This message, including any attachments, is the property of Sears Holdings Corporation and/or one of its
subsidiaries. It is confidential and may contain proprietary or legally privileged information. If you
are not the intended recipient, please delete it without reading the contents. Thank you.

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES
Lucas, Garrett | 24 May 20:34 2016

MCAUSER of asterisk

Sorry, this email gets a little long.  A little bit of background first - 

IBM MQ version 8.0.0.3 on AIX, test environment.

MQ Client for Java application connecting to QA_QMGR.

I have CHLAUTH rules setup for their server conn,

First, the block-all rules:

AMQ8878: Display channel authentication record details.
   CHLAUTH(*)                              TYPE(ADDRESSMAP)
   DESCR(Block access for all IPs)         CUSTOM( )
   ADDRESS(*)                              USERSRC(NOACCESS)

   AMQ8878: Display channel authentication record details.
   CHLAUTH(*)                              TYPE(BLOCKUSER)
   DESCR(Default rule to disallow privileged users)
   CUSTOM( )                               USERLIST(*MQADMIN)

One rule to allow remote admin access for this channel, since their ID is part of the mqm group (this is only
the case in test):

AMQ8878: Display channel authentication record details.
   CHLAUTH(QA_SRVCONN)                     TYPE(BLOCKUSER)
   DESCR( )                                                CUSTOM( )
   USERLIST(rubbish)                                 WARN(NO)

And one more rule to map the svrconn's MCAUSER to a particular ID:

AMQ8878: Display channel authentication record details.
   CHLAUTH(QA_SRVCONN)                     TYPE(ADDRESSMAP)
   DESCR( )                                                CUSTOM( )
   ADDRESS(*)                                          MCAUSER(appid)
   USERSRC(MAP)                                    CHCKCLNT(ASQMGR)

When I do a DISPLAY CHSTATUS on their svrconn, I see two running instances, one with an MCAUSER of appid (what
I'd expect), and another with an MCAUSER of '*': 

AMQ8417: Display Channel Status details.
   CHANNEL(QA_SRVCONN)                     CHLTYPE(SVRCONN)
   CONNAME(10.10.100.100)                  CURRENT
   MCAUSER(appadm)
   RAPPLTAG(WebSphere MQ Client for Java)
   STATUS(RUNNING)                         SUBSTATE(RECEIVE)
   (One conversation currently)

   AMQ8417: Display Channel Status details.
   CHANNEL(QA_SRVCONN)                     CHLTYPE(SVRCONN)
   CONNAME(10.10.100.100)                  CURRENT
   MCAUSER(*)
   RAPPLTAG(WebSphere MQ Client for Java)
   STATUS(RUNNING)                         SUBSTATE(RECEIVE)
   (Three conversations)

The doc says:

On server connection channels that share conversations, the MCAUSER field contains a user ID if all the
conversations have the same MCA user ID value. If the MCA user ID in use varies across these conversations,
the MCAUSER field contains a value of *. 

My question is:  if I have a CHLAUTH ADDRESSMAP rule installed that maps this channel to a particular user ID
(appid), then why would I see '*' as the MCAUSER value in the CHSTATUS?

Thanks,

Garrett Lucas
Sys. Programmer II - IBM MQ
LTC Mainframe Operations
T:  501.912.2556
E: Garrett.Lucas@...
FIS | Empowering the Financial World 

_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the
message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any
message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended
recipient. Thank you.

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES
Jackson, Richard R. | 24 May 18:10 2016

Static Subscriptions

I have a Qalias to a Topic with 2 subscriptions. Each sub is to a Qlocal

 

What happens if one of the qlocals fills up.

 

It looks like the message go to the bit bucket.

 

Topic is "asparent"

Subscriptions are Durable

 

We are doing this to duplicate the data.

 

Richard Jackson

DTCC/Enterprise Appl Middleware

212-855-8297

 

 

 

 

From: MQSeries List [mailto:MQSERIES <at> LISTSERV.MEDUNIWIEN.AC.AT] On Behalf Of Christopher Frank
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 10:56 AM
To: MQSERIES <at> LISTSERV.MEDUNIWIEN.AC.AT
Subject: Re: Uncommitted messages sent from remote QMGR to MQ on z/OS?

 

Hi Rob,

What was the status of the channel between MQ on AIX and zOS? Was that channel in a not-running state and messages backing up on the XMITQ? And once the channel was started the backlog of messages was suddenly shipped to the zOS queue manager? That might explain what you saw.

When MQ on AIX sends messages to MQ on z/OS across a Sender channel, those messages are sent in a batch of either the number of messages available to be sent, or some maximum (50 by default). The messages are sent under a UOW and are considered committed once they arrive at a) their target queue or b) the DLQ. Questions that come to mind:
1) Was there no DLQ defined on the zOS queue manager? If the messages cannot be delivered for some reason and there is no DLQ, the channel will stop.
2) Were messages being sent to the DLQ for some reason, and later either manually or via a DLQ handler requeued to the original target queue(s)?
3) Was the channel option to not send undeliverable messages to the DLQ set so that the channel went into a retry loop trying to put the messages to the target queue? And when the problem (whatever it was) was resolved the channel started moving messages again?

There are other possible explanations as well, and as you say, there might be more to the story. But those are some things to consider as a starting point at least.

Hope this helps!

Regards,



"Gordon, Rob" ---05/24/2016 09:38:17 AM---We had an application incident a few weeks ago that I'm trying to reconcile. I was not witness to t

From: "Gordon, Rob" <robert.gordon <at> CITIZENSBANK.COM>
To: MQSERIES <at> LISTSERV.MEDUNIWIEN.AC.AT
Date: 05/24/2016 09:38 AM
Subject: Uncommitted messages sent from remote QMGR to MQ on z/OS?
Sent by: MQSeries List <MQSERIES <at> LISTSERV.MEDUNIWIEN.AC.AT>




We had an application incident a few weeks ago that I’m trying to reconcile. I was not witness to the incident so I’m depending on people who were witnessing it giving me accurate information.

Our middleware team was reporting 2033 errors waiting for replies from a CICS/MQ application. MW was sending messages to a particular queue and some of the messages were being processed but the majority were not. The support team was using our MQ monitoring product (ASG-TMON for MQ) and did not see any queue depth buildup in either the application queue or its associated INITQ. However, days later when I was made aware of this, I reviewed the ASG Naviplex job log and could see that Naviplex was receiving alerts from TMON/MQ about a substantial queue depth buildup in the both the application queue and INITQ. If I take the support team’s word for it, I don’t understand how TMON could reporting queue depth buildup yet using the monitor you don’t see that depth. About 45 minutes later, we had a spike in the number of CICS transactions servicing that queue and the depth returned to zero. So, it’s almost as if the messages weren’t committed but I don’t understand how that’s possible, most likely because I’m not clear on how this works.

If a remote QMGR (in this case MQ running on AIX) sends messages to MQ on z/OS, are those messages considered committed once they arrive at their destination? Is there something (a commit?) that needs to happen on the remote side before those messages are made available for processing? Using the available post-incident tools I had available (TMON/CICS history) I didn’t see anything abnormal in CICS, just a drop-off in transaction rate followed by a surge – as if the messages suddenly became committed and available.

Rob

Citizens Bank is a brand name of Citizens Bank, N.A. and Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania.

Use of email is inherently insecure. Confidential information, including account information, and personally identifiable information, should not be transmitted via email, or email attachment. In no event shall Citizens Bank, N.A. or Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania accept any responsibility for the loss, use or misuse of any information, including confidential information, sent via email or email attachment to which it is the intended recipient. Neither Citizens Bank, N.A. nor Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania guarantee the accuracy of any email or email attachment, that an email will be received by either entity or that either entity will respond to any email.

This email communication is confidential and/or privileged. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and promptly destroy any record of this email.

 

List Archive - Manage Your List Settings - Unsubscribe

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com

 

 

List Archive - Manage Your List Settings - Unsubscribe

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com


DTCC DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately and delete the email and any attachments from your system. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.  The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
List Archive - Manage Your List Settings - Unsubscribe

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com

Gordon, Rob | 24 May 16:25 2016

Uncommitted messages sent from remote QMGR to MQ on z/OS?

We had an application incident a few weeks ago that I’m trying to reconcile.  I was not witness to the incident so I’m depending on people who were witnessing it giving me accurate information.  

 

Our middleware team was reporting 2033 errors waiting for replies from a CICS/MQ application.   MW was sending messages to a particular queue and some of the messages were being processed but the majority were not.   The support team was using our MQ monitoring product (ASG-TMON for MQ) and did not see any queue depth buildup in either the application queue or its associated INITQ.   However, days later when I was made aware of this, I reviewed the ASG Naviplex job log and could see that Naviplex was receiving alerts from TMON/MQ about a substantial queue depth buildup in the both the application queue and INITQ.    If I take the support team’s word for it, I don’t understand how TMON could reporting queue depth buildup yet using the monitor you don’t see that depth.   About 45 minutes later, we had a spike in the number of CICS transactions servicing that queue and the depth returned to zero.  So, it’s almost as if the messages weren’t committed but I don’t understand how that’s possible, most likely because I’m not clear on how this works.

 

If a remote QMGR (in this case MQ running on AIX) sends messages to MQ on z/OS, are those messages considered committed once they arrive at their destination?   Is there something (a commit?) that needs to happen on the remote side before those messages are made available for processing?    Using the available post-incident tools I had available (TMON/CICS history) I didn’t see anything abnormal in CICS, just a drop-off in transaction rate followed by a surge – as if the messages suddenly became committed and available.

 

Rob

 

 

 


Citizens Bank is a brand name of Citizens Bank, N.A. and Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania.

Use of email is inherently insecure. Confidential information, including account information, and personally identifiable information, should not be transmitted via email, or email attachment.   In no event shall Citizens Bank, N.A. or Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania accept any responsibility for the loss, use or misuse of any information, including confidential information, sent via email or email attachment to which it is the intended recipient.  Neither Citizens Bank, N.A.  nor  Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania guarantee the accuracy of any email or email attachment, that an email will be received by either entity or that either entity will respond to any email.

This email communication is confidential and/or privileged.   Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and promptly destroy any record of this email.


List Archive - Manage Your List Settings - Unsubscribe

Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com

Costa, D. (Damian | 20 May 17:39 2016
Picon

MQv 8.0 compatibilty with AIX V 7.2

Hi
 based on this URL MQ V 8 only supported up to AIX V 7.1?

http://www-969.ibm.com/software/reports/compatibility/clarity-reports/report/html/softwareReqsForProduct?deliverableId=1350550241693&osPlatform=AIX#!

Am I reading the table correctly?

We were planning to do AIX v 7.2 and QM v 8 upgrade in conjunction with each other....

********************
Nedbank Limited Reg No 1951/000009/06. The following link displays
the names of the Nedbank Board of Directors and Company Secretary.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/DirectorsNedbank.htm ]
This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only.
The following link will take you to Nedbank's legal notice.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/EmailDisclaimer.htm ]
********************

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES
Costa, D. (Damian | 20 May 11:21 2016
Picon

upgrading MQ v 7.0/7.1 to Mq V 8 gotchas for MQ client conns

Hi all,
 We about to embark on our marathon MQ V 8 upgrades starting with development.
 Do all MQ clients have to be Version 8 to connect to a V8 qmgr successfully?
 We will be removing existing installs and installing V 8 from scratch. 
I am particularly focussed on the user/pw encryption feature added into the MQ connection protocol.
Thanks.

********************
Nedbank Limited Reg No 1951/000009/06. The following link displays
the names of the Nedbank Board of Directors and Company Secretary.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/DirectorsNedbank.htm ]
This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only.
The following link will take you to Nedbank's legal notice.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/EmailDisclaimer.htm ]
********************

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES
Costa, D. (Damian | 19 May 16:27 2016
Picon

gateway qmgrs into MQ clusters...

Hi all,
 How do you all setup your gateway qmgrs into your mq clusters? 
Or do you just add the qmgr into the cluster so the apps  there can get /put to the cluster queues on the existing
qmgr cluster?
Ta.

********************
Nedbank Limited Reg No 1951/000009/06. The following link displays
the names of the Nedbank Board of Directors and Company Secretary.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/DirectorsNedbank.htm ]
This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only.
The following link will take you to Nedbank's legal notice.
[ http://www.nedbank.co.za/terms/EmailDisclaimer.htm ]
********************

To unsubscribe, write to LISTSERV@... and,
in the message body (not the subject), write: SIGNOFF MQSERIES

Gmane