| Author |
Message
|
| bfzhou |
 Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 10:48 am Post subject: MQAppliance HA question |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 38
Location: Springfield, VA
|
I recently got my hand on the new M2000, though only via the virtual appliance only. The HA through mirrored data is impressive!
in a pair of appliances setup for HA, I have one HAed qmgr on each device, a kind of cross-over configuration to avoid idling one in the pair.
I have HAQM1 set preferred in appl_1, and HAQM2 set preferred in appl_2. After a manual fail-over with sethagrp -s on appl_1, both qmgrs run on appl_2. But I'm unable to bring HAQM1 back on appl_1.
the command 'sethagrp -r' is explained as resume the appliance from standby mode. But it doesn't bring the qmgr running on the secondary appliance to its preferred device.
I wonder if this is only due to the virtual appliance. Can anyone owning a real thing share some experience?
thanks for sharing.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9486
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
So, which M2000?
m2000 rifle
m2000 speaker
m2000 shotgun
m2000 huawei
m2000 stoeger
m2000 aircraft
badger m2000
Something else?
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20767
Location: LI,NY
|
As a curiosity have you tried running sethagrp -s on appliance 2 ? 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bfzhou |
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 38
Location: Springfield, VA
|
| Quote: |
| As a curiosity have you tried running sethagrp -s on appliance 2? |
Yes, I tried the same on both appliances. now both HA qmgrs run on either of the appliance. So I'm unable to bring each to its preferred device.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7723
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
I atteneded a POT daya at Hursley last year where we used a VM with the Virtual Appliance running inside it.
Sadly the licensing costs of the real thing make it a non-starter for us even though it would be ideal for our systems around the world.
nice though.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
I asked at a user group meeting whether the VMs would be made available and was told no, they were for sales demonstration use only basically - but I could contact my sales rep blah blah blah...
I think they're really missing a trick here - how can I, as an independent, recommend to a client the use of something I can't properly evaluate and understand?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| bfzhou |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 38
Location: Springfield, VA
|
No, it was part of a POT. I was working on my exercises after the session. So it seems M2000 is not yet being deployed widely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7723
|
Yeah, when IBM came here for the dog-n-pony on the MQ Appliances, the message was clear - physical only, no virtual option. But that was a few months ago.
So maybe they have virtual versions of the MQ Appliance for sales demos and PoTs, but no customer could actually get their hands on one (<---irony), and that's why its not listed as a virtual option in any IBM doc on the MQ Appliance?
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 6:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
At the POT, the general concensus of those attending was that the (physical) device was aimed at BIG and really BIG organisations. The hardware is based upon that used by the Datapower boxes.
The capacity of these is immense and the Licensing costs reflect it.
Smaller or Limited versions would do the job that the Not so big enterprises but so far IBM seems to have no interest in this market segment.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Given that the appliance and MQ itself are in sync, it's not clear that a virtual edition of the appliance is of a lot of value.
The UI is a good thing, but rumors have it that this is moving to plain MQ itself.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Given that the appliance and MQ itself are in sync, it's not clear that a virtual edition of the appliance is of a lot of value... |
A limited-use virtual edition would be useful for evaluation purposes without having to rack up physical tin and all the mating of elephants that involves... 
_________________
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 |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| exerk wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Given that the appliance and MQ itself are in sync, it's not clear that a virtual edition of the appliance is of a lot of value... |
A limited-use virtual edition would be useful for evaluation purposes without having to rack up physical tin and all the mating of elephants that involves... |
Like something shown in a POT or POC ?
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
Like something shown in a POT or POC ? |
Yes but.....
One that could be used outside of IBM premises. You know in a real customer network so that real life evaluations could be made.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| exerk wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Given that the appliance and MQ itself are in sync, it's not clear that a virtual edition of the appliance is of a lot of value... |
A limited-use virtual edition would be useful for evaluation purposes without having to rack up physical tin and all the mating of elephants that involves... |
Like something shown in a POT or POC ? |
The closest I got was a user group demo at Southbank, and it didn't work. Whether little old one-man-band me would be invited to Hursley for a a POC/POT is unlikely, and I had one previous client ask me if the M2000 was of any use - my only answer was "you'll have to ask big blue", which I believe they did and got hit with a marketing barrage (small-footprint concern you see). If IBM are prepared to 'give away' MQ as a developer edition why can't they let people have the appliance VMs to work with on the same basis to evaluate them?
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
|
