| Author |
Message
|
| crossland |
 Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:32 pm Post subject: overlapping cluster wlb |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 26 Jun 2001
Posts: 248
|
2 overlapping clusters:
g and b1 queue mgrs - cluster1
b1 and b2 qmgrs - cluster2
Queue q1 defined on b1 and b2
workload balanced on cluster2
Q alias defined on qmgr g to expose q1
When I put to the alias queue messages always go to q1 on qmgr b1
How do I balance the workload using aliases and overlapping clusters? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
- expose the cluster to the outside world with a CLUSTER ALIAS
qmgr alias that resolves to a blank qmgr inside the cluster
- use the cluster alias as remote qmgr for routing anything from outside the cluster into the cluster that needs to be load balanced.
- expose your "edge" cluster alias in the overlapping (gateway) qmgrs so that the path to the other cluster is known throughout the cluster.
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| crossland |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 26 Jun 2001
Posts: 248
|
Thanks for that. Looking at the Clusters manual, it looks as if the problem may be due to the following logic in the default Workload Balancer:
"a local queue is chosen if the message was not put locally (that is, the message was received over a cluster channel)."
This seems to suggest that that if a queue exists locally on the bridge queue manager, it will be used whenever a request was received over a cluster channel.
Apart from altering the workload exit, has anyone managed to get round this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| crossland wrote: |
| Apart from altering the workload exit, has anyone managed to get round this? |
Upgrade to WMQv6, where that behaviour can be modified via parameters.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| crossland |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 26 Jun 2001
Posts: 248
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| Upgrade to WMQv6, where that behaviour can be modified via parameters. |
The CLWLUseQ parameter would be great except that "If the put originates from a cluster channel, this attribute does not apply." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| crossland wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| Upgrade to WMQv6, where that behaviour can be modified via parameters. |
The CLWLUseQ parameter would be great except that "If the put originates from a cluster channel, this attribute does not apply." |
Your "edge" qmgr should be a gateway qmgr. This means it does not have any local queues (except the DLQ and or xmitqs and the system queues).
Thus it will have a pure router function and you will have load balancing in the clusters.
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
