| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Different client/server conn behavior: v9.4.0.15 vs v9.4.4.1 |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| rekarm01 |
 Posted: Fri Feb 27, 2026 7:10 pm Post subject: Different client/server conn behavior: v9.4.0.15 vs v9.4.4.1 |
 |
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 1417
|
We had one MQ installation (v9.4.0.15) on Linux, (rpm packages for server, but not for client, nor sample programs, and no SDK to recompile applications). Our application could not establish a client connection to a remote queue manager (originally compiled long ago with -lmqm, using MQCONN() only, with no MQ_CNO parameters). We wanted to reproduce the issue using IBM's sample programs, (to rule out a problem with our code), so one of our users downloaded a copy of "9.4.4.1-IBM-MQC-Redist-LinuxX64.tar.gz" from the IBM website, extracted the sample programs and libraries, and copied them to their user directory.
When we ran the v9.4.4.1 "amqsgbr" sample program, using the installed v9.4.0.15 libraries, attempting to create a client connection to a remote queue manager, we get an MQRC 2058 error (MQRC_Q_MGR_NAME_ERROR), as expected:
| Code: |
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH='/usr/lib64/' MQSERVER='RMT.SVRCONN/TCP/HostName(PortNum)' ./amqsgbr QueueName RmtQMgrName
Sample AMQSGBR0 (browse) start
RmtQMgrName
MQCONN ended with reason code 2058 |
However, when we run the same application, using the copied v9.4.4.1 libraries, it connects successfully, with no error:
| Code: |
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH='../../lib64/' MQSERVER='RMT.SVRCONN/TCP/HostName(PortNum)' ./amqsgbr QueueName RmtQMgrName
Sample AMQSGBR0 (browse) start
RmtQMgrName
no more messages
Sample AMQSGBR0 (browse) end |
We have since properly installed the client libraries and sample programs for v9.4.0.15, but we see the same behavior: the sample program fails with MQRC 2058 (as expected) when using the installed v9.4.0.15 libraries, but it succeeds (as not expected) when using the copied v9.4.4.1 libraries. IBM has also since pointed us to MQGem's helpful article about MQ_CONNECT_TYPE, (thanks Morag), which will undoubtedly help us resolve our original problem. But that doesn't explain why the v9.4.4.1 libraries seem to work well enough without it.
So, the question is: in the above test cases, why would the client connection succeed when using v9.4.4.1 libraries, while it failed with MQRC 2058 when using the v9.4.0.15 libraries? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2026 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20774
Location: LI,NY
|
Potentially because you are trying to use the server libraries...
Use amqsgbrc
And maybe 9.4.4.1 is intelligent enough to try the client libraries after the fail o the server ones...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rekarm01 |
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2026 11:17 am Post subject: Re: Different client/server conn behavior ... |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 1417
|
Thanks for your reply. Our original goal was to (transparently) use an existing user application, (compiled with -lmqm), with either local or client connections, but it wasn't working for client connections. We didn't want to have to compile two different applications. IBM doesn't support debugging user code, so we had to reproduce the same error with IBM sample code. This required using a server application (amqsgbr) to attempt a client connection.
We expected amqsgbr to fail, for both versions of MQ. Instead, it only failed for one, MQ v9.4.0.15, which requires setting the MQ_CONNECT_TYPE environment variable, to use either local or client connections. But for some reason, MQ v9.4.4.1 does not seem to need MQ_CONNECT_TYPE for this. IBM did not document any relevant changes between the two versions, so we asked them to confirm or explain our observations. They haven't answered yet, so we thought to also ask about it here. |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
