| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
| Where does my message go?! |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| WingCommanderBadger |
 Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
| Quote: |
| But, it does offer another option for the architecture. In some cases, I'm sure it will exactly what the doctor ordered. |
I completely agree. Like I said, I'm only investigating at the moment but if marooned message loss is not a problem then it seems like a viable approach to me especially if you don't fancy getting to grips with a full-on HA solution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
WingCommanderBadger, in your first test, was the non persistent message perhaps expired by the time you brought QMB back up?
Because I see no reason why that message should have been discarded otherwise.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| WingCommanderBadger |
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
I don't believe so. QMB was brought back up within a minute of putting the message via QMA in both cases (failure with a non-persistent msg and success with a persistent msg) and I haven't set an expiry on any of my test messages.
It's interesting because it's not the behaviour I was expecting either. I'd like to know the logic MQ is using to make the decision on discarding the message too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| WingCommanderBadger wrote: |
| The testing I have done on my clustering prototype indicates that it works fine. |
Interesting. I'm not blessed with v6 so can't actually test this myself (& the frustration is reaching epic proportions) but are you saying that messages are not getting "stranded" to copy a term from earlier in this thread?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| WingCommanderBadger |
| Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 32
Location: London, UK
|
I believe it's still possible for messages that have arrived at a Primary QM but have not been taken off a queue to become 'marooned' when the Primary QM fails. However, all subsequent messages sent do indeed get routed to a Secondary QM.
I've also got it to work with overlapping clusters with Primary and Secondary 'Gateway' QMs in the intersection of the two clusters - this to me strikes me as a good place to use it as I imagine the potential for marooned messages at the Gateway is reasonably small. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
