Skip to Main Content

This is an IBM Automation portal for Integration products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Future consideration
Created by Guest
Created on Oct 13, 2015

Provide User/Custom Fields in Object Definitions

I would like to have a few user/custom fields available in the object definitions for the ability to add custom information about the object. One of the very important pieces of information we need to track for objects is the OWNER for monitoring purposes. Having the owner documented in the object definition allows us to alert the owner of the object directly when there is a problem instead of alerting the system administrators or help desk for everything and then they looking up the owner of the object to notify. Without a user/custom field for this data, we have had to steal half of the description for this which does not leave much room for the description itself. Another piece of information we store is when the object was last reviewed for its usage. We keep track of when queues were last put to and gotten from, and then when a queue has not had either of these events for a year we review for usage and check with the owner if they still need the queue or not. For this data, we stole another unused text field in the object definition. I could see the possibility of storing more customized information in the object definition if we had some fields to keep it. This would be very helpful functionality. Each field would not have to be that large - maybe 48 or 64 bytes each. A minimum of 3 fields would be desirable.

Idea priority Medium
RFE ID 78275
RFE Product IBM MQ
  • Guest
    Dec 8, 2016

    In general, user-defined fields across objects and the QMgr itself would be welcome. I imagined these as perhaps like message properties. Currently, I store name-value pairs in namelists and although it works, it requires strict discipline on object names to preserve relational integrity between the namelists and the objects to which they refer. As IBM is embracing (indeed rebranding) MQ for cloud and virtualization, machine-readable metadata *in* the product itself goes a long way toward realizing that vision.

  • Guest
    Oct 20, 2015

    We are considering solutions that would satisfy this requirement for a future version of MQ.

  • Guest
    Oct 15, 2015

    Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
    Brand - WebSphere
    Product family - Integration
    Product - IBM MQ

    For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
    Brand - WebSphere
    Product family - Connectivity and Integration
    Product - IBM MQ