| Author |
Message
|
| kavithadhevi |
 Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:20 am Post subject: How to use LDAP to communicate to MQ |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 201
Location: USA
|
Hi Guys,
I would like to get some good suggestion on how to make use of LDAP server play a role between websphere app server and MQ.
Here is my scenario i would like to have as an option.
Environment: We have websphere app server v5.x and MQ v5.3.10(soon to be upgraded to v6.x) on different server and is running on AIX 5.2 OS.
I would like to place a LDAP server in between websphere and mq to gain some failover techniques like connecting to multiple mq servers on a failover situation to start manual/automatic process. I gained this idea from sonicmq broker using ldap servers for failover where you can point to multiple broker in the same LDAP server information.
Is this possible with MQ? I understand that i could easily a failover using HACMP or MQclustering since we don't want to go that route. i want get some idea of using multiple connectivity to different queue manager scenario.
Please bounce off some good suggestions and ideas.
_________________
Thanks in Advance. 
Kavitha
IBM Certified System Administrator
Websphere MQ v 5.3
www.zealphoenix.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
So is your plan to specify different destination in an LDAP server, and use them as failover locations?
I'd be inclined to use client connections for this kind of failover.
Note - MQ clustering does not provide a high availability solution. Please see many of my previous posts on this subject, which is a favourite rant of mine! 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
How would an LDAP server know to load balance something?
If you want transparent, load-balanced connections to WMQ, this is how to do it.
Use client connections. Use client connection tables to isolate the application from the real name of the queue manager that is connected to, and qmgr aliases to complete that isolation. Put a network level load balancer between the clients and the queue managers. Consider creating a set of gateway qmgrs to an MQ Cluster.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kavithadhevi |
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 201
Location: USA
|
We are not planning on using MQ clustering. so i lost that option.
Would client channel connection help me connect to different queue managers using the same JNDI name reference from a websphere config stand point?
Also, we are using MQ JMS pub/sub pretty intensively here too. so will client channel connection help us here ?
We use serverconn , can client channel be used instead of this one?
_________________
Thanks in Advance.
Kavitha
IBM Certified System Administrator
Websphere MQ v 5.3
www.zealphoenix.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
A svrconn is half of a client connection.
In fact, it's the server side of the connection. The clntconn is the client half of the connection.
How is the JNDI supposed to know to give you information for server A one time, and information for Server B the next time? How is LDAP supposed to know that?
You do not show enough understanding of what's going on to actually architect and solve this problem yourself. I'm not in any way saying that you don't *have* that understanding, nor are incapable of having that understanding, nor incapable of architecting or solving this problem yourself.
I'm just saying you aren't showing that you know enough.
If you want more understanding of MQ client connections, you should read the WMQ Client manual, and the WMQ Intercommunications manual. Or you can look for redbooks and redpapers on building load balanced MQ infrastructures.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| kavithadhevi wrote: |
Would client channel connection help me connect to different queue managers using the same JNDI name reference from a websphere config stand point?
Also, we are using MQ JMS pub/sub pretty intensively here too. so will client channel connection help us here ?
We use serverconn , can client channel be used instead of this one? |
You seem to be mixing a number of concepts here. You've got JNDI, client connections and pub/sub. Clearly all are linked by their existence in your architecture, but they're not dependant on each other.
Work out how you plan to connection the applications, using client connections for quasi-failover/load balancing if you want. Work out how you describe your architecture in JNDI terms. Work out what your pub/sub architecture looks like. Don't thrash about trying to do it all at once.
Your sig describes you as an MQ Administrator, so I won't point you at the manuals, but remind you of their existence along with the various other resources available.
Deep breath, work the problem, research the problem, implement the solution.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
Jeff wrote
| Quote: |
Put a network level load balancer between the clients and the queue managers. Consider creating a set of gateway qmgrs to an MQ Cluster.
|
Why we need network level load balancer here? is not mq cluster along with a gateway enough for that purpose? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Most people view a gateway qmgr as a single point of failure - this may or may not be an accurate impression.
Using an NLB, you can achieve the same thing with multiple gateway qmgrs, where the number of gateways is transparent to the clients.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqdev |
| Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 136
|
Kavitha,
Consider the following:
Define CLNTCONN chls on a QM with the chl names matching the SVRCONN chls and copy over the Client-channel table. Now the QM Name in the CLNTCONN chl should be a fictitious name (readup MQ wild cards for Client Channel names). The LDAP / JNDI needs to be configured to provide the fictitious QM name with the MQ Wildcard prefixed to it, when queried for the QM name. When the App is trying to establish a connection, it will try to connect (calls MQCONN assuming thats what is coded) using the fictitious QM name which will return a bunch of CLNTCONN chl names from the Client-connection channel table. The chl names returned are in the lexicographic order and each is tried in turn to establish a connection. Due to the wildcard, the QM name is *not* validated (otherwise it is validated and the App fails to connect as the QM name does not match the QMName specified in the CLNTCONN definition). Thus your app connects to the first available QM which hosts the SVRCONN chl whose name matches the chl name looked up from the Client-connection table using the fictitious QM name. You need to investigate/work around LDAP/JNDI configs to not to interpret the MQ Wild card which is "*".
Theoritically this should work ...try and let us know if it does!
Cheers,
-mqdev |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
