| Author | 
		  Message
		 | 
		
		  | Rahul999 | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:47 am    Post subject: MQ Weird Problem regarding the "q" file size | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		    Centurion
 
 Joined: 14 Mar 2007 Posts: 134
  
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				Hi All,
 
 
Today I faced a issue(which looks weird to me). What happened on our AIX server was (where we are running Websphere MQ 6.0.2.8, the /var/mqm  file system became almost full.
 
 
To clean up the file system, I tried to look for files bigger than 50 MB in that file system and found that a 'q' file present at the below location is of size approx 75MB.
 
 
/var/mqm/qmgrs/BROKER1/queues/LOG.QUEUE/q
 
 
I was expecting a huge number of messages in this queue but when I checked the depth of this queue, it shows CURDEPTH as '0', so I went back to the location again and found that the file size is still that big.
 
 
what could be the reason, I understand that there were lot of activities was going on so that queue might have reached to that size, but when there are no messages(all got processed), then why the q file size stays so big.
 
 
Any observation folks?
 
 
Regards,
  Last edited by Rahul999 on Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:56 am; edited 1 time in total | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		  | Back to top | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | exerk | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 6:53 am    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		    Jedi Council
 
 Joined: 02 Nov 2006 Posts: 6339
  
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				I believe there has been previous discussion on the board (somewhere) in regard to how/when a queue manager scavenges queue files, and shrinks them when necessary. Worth your while searching I think...
 
 
EDIT: And if your file system went nearly full, it suggests that your sizing is incorrect, so you should review it and grow the file system accordingly. _________________ 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 | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | sumit | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:20 am    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		   Partisan
 
 Joined: 19 Jan 2006 Posts: 398
  
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				Curdepth could be 0, but how about the uncom messages?
 
It could be that the messages are in uncommitted state and hence not getting reflected in curdepth. _________________ Regards
 
Sumit | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		  | Back to top | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | fjb_saper | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:20 am    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		    Grand High Poobah
 
 Joined: 18 Nov 2003 Posts: 20768 Location: LI,NY 
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				
   
	| sumit wrote: | 
   
  
	Curdepth could be 0, but how about the uncom messages?
 
It could be that the messages are in uncommitted state and hence not getting reflected in curdepth. | 
   
 
 
Sorry but uncommitted messages are reflected in qdepth. They are just not in a getable state.   _________________ MQ & Broker admin | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		  | Back to top | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | fjb_saper | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:22 am    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		    Grand High Poobah
 
 Joined: 18 Nov 2003 Posts: 20768 Location: LI,NY 
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				
   
	| exerk wrote: | 
   
  
	I believe there has been previous discussion on the board (somewhere) in regard to how/when a queue manager scavenges queue files, and shrinks them when necessary. Worth your while searching I think...
 
 
EDIT: And if your file system went nearly full, it suggests that your sizing is incorrect, so you should review it and grow the file system accordingly. | 
   
 
 
 
  MQ decides when it's time to shrink a file and it is obviously not when you expect it to. As a work around try putting a single message on the queue and then getting it. If you are lucky it might work...   _________________ MQ & Broker admin | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		  | Back to top | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | sumit | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:00 am    Post subject:  | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		   Partisan
 
 Joined: 19 Jan 2006 Posts: 398
  
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				
   
	| fjb_saper wrote: | 
   
  
	
   
	| sumit wrote: | 
   
  
	Curdepth could be 0, but how about the uncom messages?
 
It could be that the messages are in uncommitted state and hence not getting reflected in curdepth. | 
   
 
 
Sorry but uncommitted messages are reflected in qdepth. They are just not in a getable state.   | 
   
 
 
Yes, you are right. However, I was refering to a scenario like this
 
But now I am thinking if it can increase the q file size.   _________________ Regards
 
Sumit | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		  | Back to top | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | mvic | 
		  
		    
			  
				 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:09 pm    Post subject: Re: MQ Weird Problem regarding the "q" file size | 
				     | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		    Jedi
 
 Joined: 09 Mar 2004 Posts: 2080
  
  | 
		  
		    
			  
				
   
	| Rahul999 wrote: | 
   
  
	/var/mqm  file system became almost full.
 
 
To clean up the file system, I tried to look for files bigger than 50 MB in that file system and found that a 'q' file present at the below location is of size approx 75MB.
 
 
/var/mqm/qmgrs/BROKER1/queues/LOG.QUEUE/q | 
   
 
 
You probably had 75 Mb of messages on that queue quite recently.  They are all gone now, and the queue manager will shrink the file at a time of its choosing.
 
 
I searched the internet and found this IBM page which seems to contain relevant statements: http://www.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?rs=171&uid=swg21110841
 
 
By the way, one queue growing to 75 Mb should not be an unplanned event.  I mean, it should not be allowed that this causes the filesystem to be full.  I suggest you get more space allocated to allow proper headroom in case something similar happens again. | 
			   
			 
		   | 
		
		
		  | Back to top | 
		  
		  	
		   | 
		
		
		    | 
		
		
		  | 
		    
		   |