Author |
Message
|
cra1gl1 |
Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 6:21 am Post subject: xmit queue gets disabled when a sdr chl is stopped |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 30
|
Hi,
I was reading a mq doc and it says stopping a sender channel get inhibits the associated transmit queue. If this is true, what if more than one sender channel uses the same xmitq ? aren't those channel-links affected? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Vitor |
Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 6:26 am Post subject: Re: why does a xmit queue gets disabled when a sdr chl is st |
|
|
 Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005 Posts: 26093 Location: Texas, USA
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
what if more than one sender channel uses the same xmitq ? |
It can't. The sender MCA opens the xmitq exclusively so the second channel that tries to use it will fail.
It's also topologically weird to want to do that. Why would you want 2 channels, with 2 destinations, to have all their messages in a single queue? How would you expect the right message to go to the right place?
Note this behavior is for a sender channel, not a cluster sender channel. _________________ Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cra1gl1 |
Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 30
|
I thought the message header contains the details on what qmgr its targeted to and the sender channel to that qmgr picks the messages. Am I wrong? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Vitor |
Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005 Posts: 26093 Location: Texas, USA
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
I thought the message header contains the details on what qmgr its targeted to and the sender channel to that qmgr picks the messages. Am I wrong? |
You're describing a cluster sender channel. _________________ Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cra1gl1 |
Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 30
|
hmm, so in distributed queuing(non clustered), a qmgr should have a separate transmit queue for each of the remote qmgrs it needs to connect to? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
fjb_saper |
Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003 Posts: 20756 Location: LI,NY
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
hmm, so in distributed queuing(non clustered), a qmgr should have a separate transmit queue for each of the remote qmgrs it needs to connect to? |
Yes that's the design. You can forgo that if you have a hub and spoke setup.
Everybody talks to the HUB...  _________________ MQ & Broker admin |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Vitor |
Posted: Fri May 11, 2018 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
 Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005 Posts: 26093 Location: Texas, USA
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
hmm, so in distributed queuing(non clustered), a qmgr should have a separate transmit queue for each of the remote qmgrs it needs to connect to? |
If you read more MQ docs, you'll discover that the software's default name resolution expects a separate xmitq for each remote queue manager, named for the remote queue manager, and you need to add additional configuration to make it use a different one. _________________ Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cra1gl1 |
Posted: Fri May 11, 2018 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 30
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Vitor |
Posted: Fri May 11, 2018 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
 Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005 Posts: 26093 Location: Texas, USA
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
Could someone explain how it is diff from distributed and cluster setup please? |
It's a specific kind of distributed set up where the topology is configured (as I alluded to above) so that name resolution makes all messages flow through a designated central queue manager. _________________ Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mvic |
Posted: Fri May 11, 2018 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 Jedi
Joined: 09 Mar 2004 Posts: 2080
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
But I couldn't find any doc on hub-spoke model |
If you search Google for hub spoke mq you'll find plenty of hits. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
cra1gl1 |
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 25 Apr 2018 Posts: 30
|
Quote: |
It's a specific kind of distributed set up where the topology is configured (as I alluded to above) so that name resolution makes all messages flow through a designated central queue manager. |
From this definition, Is a qmgr used as gateway between two clusters considered a HUB? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Vitor |
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
 Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005 Posts: 26093 Location: Texas, USA
|
cra1gl1 wrote: |
Quote: |
It's a specific kind of distributed set up where the topology is configured (as I alluded to above) so that name resolution makes all messages flow through a designated central queue manager. |
From this definition, Is a qmgr used as gateway between two clusters considered a HUB? |
It's more often considered a single point of failure
But yes, on that definition it would be because you're be using queue manager and cluster aliases to funnel traffic through that queue manager. Not a hub in the hub-and-spoke sense of the word but certainly a hub in the traffic sense.
Depending on you did it, you may or may not have transmission queues that are inhibited in the way you originally posted.
I remain uncertain how important the status of the transmission queue is in normal usage, though I accept it's an interesting philosophical / educational aspect. _________________ Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|