DTS transaction Process when Fails.

Post questions here relative to DataStage Enterprise/PX Edition for such areas as Parallel job design, Parallel datasets, BuildOps, Wrappers, etc.

Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy

Post Reply
allavivek
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 5:07 pm

DTS transaction Process when Fails.

Post by allavivek »

Hi All,

I am trying to achieve: When the records from MQ are successfully loaded to target DB then messages should be deleted from queue. But when message is failed loading in to target DB message should not be removed from MQ.

----

My understanding on using Work Queue(with in MQ connector) in DTS process is DTS removes messages from work queue if transaction was successful, else messages remain in work queue.

Instead of not using work queue cant we not implement it with source queue itself ?

Thank you.
allavivek
Premium Member
Premium Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 5:07 pm

Re: DTS transaction Process when Fails.

Post by allavivek »

I came across :

"If the job includes a source queue that does not use a work queue, you must set the Message read mode property in the connector to Keep. Then you must grant the get and browse authorizations for the source queue. In this case, the connector reads the messages in browse mode, and the Distributed Transaction stage reads them in destructive mode."

I gave source queue get and browse access and i ran job first time, records are loaded.When i reran second time still records are in source queue. Should i need to set any additional properties in MQ connector or DTS ?
ray.wurlod
Participant
Posts: 54607
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Post by ray.wurlod »

Setting the Message Read property to "Keep" prescribes precisely this behaviour. If you want to destroy the messages on the input queue, change the Message Read property.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Post Reply