The most common other use would be cases where the queue names are unknown or temporary. What if an application decides it needs report messages or uses temp dyn queues for it's replies? Also it's more likely application queue names could change than qmgr names.
-----Original Message----- From: Philip, Aby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 11:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Queue manager aliases and remote queue defintions Hi everyone, This doubt is regarding the uses of the remote queue defintions vs queue manager aliases. One of the most basic uses of queue manager aliases (according to the manual) is that the application does not need to change the name of the queue manager which it would be putting in the MQOD structure and still get away with sending messages to different queue managers according to the values in the queue manager alias defintion. My doubt is using remote queue definitions also the application can still send a message to any queue manager it wants to without changing anything in the application. It will only put messages to the remote queue definition..and the transfer will take place again to any queue manager value in the remote queue defintion. I think we can reduce the total number of objects created when we are talking of multi hopping using queue manager aliases and all as compared to trying to acheive the same functionality using remote queue defintions...But otherwise is there some other particular advantage by using the queue manager alias? Or am I missing something in these assumptions? Thanks in advance. Kind Regards Aby Philip Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com Archive: http://vm.akh-wien.ac.at/MQSeries.archive Instructions for managing your mailing list subscription are provided in the Listserv General Users Guide available at http://www.lsoft.com Archive: http://vm.akh-wien.ac.at/MQSeries.archive
