| Author |
Message
|
| freddybobs |
 Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:24 am Post subject: Remote queue definitions - good or bad |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 2
|
Hi,
What is the benefit of using a remote queue definition on a local queue manager as opposed to write directly to the queue using the remote queue manager? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| bower5932 |
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 27 Aug 2001
Posts: 3023
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
|
| The remote queue definition gives you application transparency. The administrator can change the queue and queue manager on it and your application need never know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wschutz |
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 3316
Location: IBM (retired)
|
It allows you to divorce the physical topology (ie, remote queue and qmgr name) from the application.
_________________
-wayne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| hguapluas |
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 105
Location: San Diego
|
| It also gives you more control over potentially problematic connections as you can more easily isolate problems and stop/disable specific connections with remote queues vs having to shutdown a queue that everyone connects to (impacting everyone vs a single connection). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
It also allows you to take advantage of the 'guaranteed delivery' aspect of MQ.
A bindings/server connection is a lot more reliable and stable than a client connection (ten 9s instead of about 7 or 8 on a well behaved network).
The application does not have to code to support network connections or handle network failures.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| freddybobs |
| Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 2
|
| Are there any performance overheads when using a remote queue definition? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| freddybobs wrote: |
| Are there any performance overheads when using a remote queue definition? |
For what?
The putting application?
No.
The getting application?
No.
The total system?
Yes.
How much? It depends.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wschutz |
| Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 3316
Location: IBM (retired)
|
I think the benefits of using remote queue definitions out weighs the very small performance cost involved.
_________________
-wayne |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
