Hi
I am trying to do two thing
#1
One thread is reading a
Queue continuously. I am checking whether the messages are available in the
queue or not by using a method currentDepth(). If messages are available reading
the messages else do nothing.
Here is the code used to
open queue and
I will be out of the office starting 08/02/2004 and will not return until
08/04/2004.
I will be out of the office visiting customer sites on 8/2 and 8/3. I will
not have access to e-mail during this period. I will respond when I
return. If the matter is urgent, call and leave a message at
What I am trying to figure out is: How do you move
the destructive get cursor?
i.e.
How do I position the destructive get cursor at
message #5 without first deleting messages #1,2,3
and 4?
Roger,
Short answer - you don't. The type of GET you are using always operates at the head
of the
T.rob,
If many ways a queue is similar to a random access file, where a message
can be read sequentially, or via a key,deleted (destructive read) and
written by one or more apps. Normally, when a file is being updated,
exclusive control is established beforehand to ensure the integrity of the
Hello.
The text below can be found in the AMI support pack (MA0F) page. Based on that
and on another reply I had from Hursley we are recommending our customers to
move away from the AMI.
Heinz Klein
OLTP Tecnologia Solucoes Ltda.
Sao Paulo/SP - Brasil
Rick,
The problem with this approach is that MQ gives you two types of GET and neither
involve a cursor that you control directly. The first type of GET is that you take
whatever the next message is that the QMgr gives you in the current logical view of
the queue. In this method, you GET
RC 2039 means you are trying to do a PUT but to a queue that you have not opened for output. So, removeMQC.MQOO_INPUT_AS_Q_DEF from your #2 program and give it a try again.
Regards,
RuziSrinivas Amarnadh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
I am trying to do two thing
#1
One thread is reading a
T.rob,
The alternative I proposed is pretty much what you described in the second
method, e.g. the msgids would be well known, and therefore could be used to
remove a set of messages. I wholly agree with you that a generalized queue
program, e.g. utility, should not be reliant upon the position
T.Rob,
Excellent. Very well said. I hope Bank of America pays you well. :))
For those that were interested in the GMO settings, I have attached 3 code
C snippets that will demonstrate the 3 scenarios that I listed in my
previous email.
Just to summarize what I have learned from these 3 test
