| Author |
Message
|
| ramkumar |
 Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2004 4:07 am Post subject: workflow3.4 to 3.4 on aix4.3 - fmczchk on server fails |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 4
|
Hi,
We have upgraded workflow3.3 to 3.4 on aix4.3/db2 7.1
The fmczchk on the client is fine and on the server gives the followig error(server and client on two different aix machines):
FMC34503E: sqleatin: SQL1427N An instance attachment does not exist.
FMC34507I: The TP monitor (mqmax) need not be set on this platform.
FMC34407W: User mqm does not have connect authority.
Then we applied SP2 but we got more errors! i.e.,
FMC34503E: sqleatin: SQL1427N An instance attachment does not exist.
FMC34032E: Cannot load TP Monitor library mqmax: A file or directory in the path name does not exist (rc = 2).
FMC34407W: User mqm does not have connect authority
Can someone help on this..thanks
Ram |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Prahasith |
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 16 May 2003
Posts: 184
Location: Kansas City
|
Readme for WebSphere MQ Workflow v3.4.0
| Quote: |
When you use the fmczchk utility to check a server configuration,
it might display the error message:
FMC34032E: Cannot load TP Monitor library mq.dll: The specified module
could not be found.
Erroneously, the utility checks for mq.dll (or libmq.a|.so|.sl) instead
of mqmax.dll. If you receive this message, check that the
mqmax library (for Windows mqmax.dll, for AIX libmqmax.a, for Solaris
libmqmax.so, and for HP-UX libmqmax.sl) exists, is accessible and
loadable. If so, you can ignore the error message. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramkumar |
| Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2004 8:28 pm Post subject: FMC34503E: sqleatin: SQL1427N An instance attachment..... |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 4
|
thanks for the reply. I too have seen the quote in the readme file. But we have this one not addressed anywhere.
FMC34503E: sqleatin: SQL1427N An instance attachment does not exist.
Hope some one who have already come across will address...Awaiting for reply.
Thanks
Ram |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vennela |
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 4055
Location: Hyderabad, India
|
| Quote: |
| FMC34503E: sqleatin: SQL1427N An instance attachment does not exist |
Is it a three tier configuration( remote DB)?. If yes, then you can safely ignore this error. This error is present in 332 but I am not sure if it went away with 3.4.
This is what I found from the IBM's website.
| Quote: |
Problem
This is a bug in FMCZCHK in that the command being executed is GET DB CFG for Database (RDB1). In a three tier configuration, you cannot do this command against a remote database. Working with DB2 I was informed to execute this command against a remote database, you need to use the ATTACH to Node user userid using password. This brings up another interesting fact about FMCZUTIL. Nowhere in the setup does it ask for a Node name to access a remote database, in fact it defaults to the first entry in the Node directory. Since I have multiple entries in the Node directory, this caused some confusion because Workflow always used the first one (alphabetically). The solution as I see it, in the FMCZUTIL utility, request the Node name be entered, then FMCZCHK can use the Node name to issue the GET DB CFG for Database against a remote database. When I run FMCZCHK utility, I get the following messages: FMC34013I: ===> Admin Server found, checks started. FMC34122I: Environment variable DB2_RR_TO_RS is set to 'YES'. FMC34500I: ==> Database Manager configuration for db2conn. FMC34508I: Query heap size is 1500. FMC34501I: ==> Database configuration for RDB1. FMC34503E: sqlfxdb: SQL1403N? The username and/or password supplied is incorrect
Solution
This is a Workflow requirement (PD tools and improvements).
Besides the 3-tier set-up, there are other areas not covered if using
fmczchk. It is not able to handle complex environments. This is a known
issue for which a requirement has been levied to Workflow development
for consideration in the future.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramkumar |
| Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2004 9:26 pm Post subject: db2 configured as remote instance |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 4
|
Hi,
Thanks for the reply. In our case the following is the setup:
WAS Client is on one AIX box (Box 1)
WF Server3.4 is on another AIX box (Box 2)
We have DB2 7.1 is on the same Box 2 but the db2 instance WF Server uses is configured as remote instance.Though this is physically 2 Tier, we are technically into 3 Tier, I guess.
Can we ignore this safely ?..Or will it have any show stoppers in production later ?..Please clarify.
Thanks
Ram |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vennela |
| Posted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 4055
Location: Hyderabad, India
|
| Quote: |
| Can we ignore this safely ?.. |
Yes, as I already told |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sshaker |
| Posted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 20 Sep 2002
Posts: 185
|
Hi
I dont think the configuration can be considered 3-tier by having a remote instance. The purpose of having a 3-tier architecture is explained in couple of documents/redbooks.. and we may refer to the best practices. The benefit of having a 'separate' box for future needs in terms of CPU etc. is ruled out in this case. It may still be considered 2-tier. Any thoughts?
_________________
shaker |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vennela |
| Posted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 4055
Location: Hyderabad, India
|
| Quote: |
The benefit of having a 'separate' box for future needs in terms of CPU etc. is ruled out in this case. It may still be considered 2-tier. Any thoughts?
|
From what Ram said I understand that he is trying to simulate a test system that is a representation of the production system. They might have decided that the production is a 3-tier and since they might not have enough hardware for TEST, he is trying to simulate it.
I don't think he is trying for any extra mileage in terms of performnce by calling it a 3-tier architecture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ramkumar |
| Posted: Wed Jan 28, 2004 9:55 pm Post subject: its a simulation |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 4
|
| Yes, What Vennela told is correct. I do agree and have gone thru the documents which talk about the advantages of having T3 setup. Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
