| Author |
Message
|
| atheek |
 Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:42 am Post subject: weblogic - client V/s binding |
 |
|
Partisan
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 327
Location: Sydney
|
Hi all.
We have a weblogic application that connects to mq using foreign jms and in client mode. Both the weblogic server and MQ runs in the same physical machine. Is this setting of client mode has any specific advantage compared to bindings mode. I thought bindings mode is more faster and secure for such a requirement.
Regards
Atheek |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:55 am Post subject: Re: weblogic - client V/s binding |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| atheek wrote: |
I thought bindings mode is more faster and secure for such a requirement.
|
It is, but assumes the application will always run on the same machine. Only your requirements determine if this will indeed always be the case.
Check out some of the other client v bindings discussions in the forum for some possibly useful points that could inform your decision.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
It can be more useful to run a client connection in this particular case because it gives the MQ administrator more control over what user the connection is run as (using MCAUSER on the svrconn).
It can also be more useful because it allows the app server to be moved to another box without changing anything.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| atheek |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 327
Location: Sydney
|
| our appln communicates with around 18 downstream applns via mq. so we hav 18 remote queues at our qmgr and it communicates with downstream thru point to point communication. so our design is like weblogic puts messages to mq remote queues via client connection and from there its transferred to the destination qmgrs via channels. I think this design is crap..since the weblogic put messages directly to the downstream via client connections. I want to know if there is any pros in following the above design |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
It makes sense to have one app communicate with one queue manager, instead of 18.
It makes some sense to have an app communicate using a client channel instead of a bindings connection for the reasons I said - it gives the administrator more control, and it makes the app and app server more portable.
Whether it makes MORE sense in your case, depends quite a bit. You see to be arguing mainly that it's not as performant. Well - it might not be, but it might not matter.
If you have a 1 second response time in your SLA, and your app takes a tenth of a second with a client connection and it would take 100th of a second with a bindings connection... so what?
As for it being more secure - this is actually a very complicated question, and some would argue that *no* Java connection is "secure" at all. I wouldn't - but some would. Again, a client connection can provide some advantages here - SSL for example or channel exits - that aren't possible with a binding connection. But as I say - this is a really complicated question.
Proper enterprise design is not limited in scope to what the code does, or how the data flows. System Administration is an Aspect, as is Security, and Operations, and several other things.
Even proper design of an application in an enterprise requires some consideration for these things - and they are more important when considering application DEPLOYMENT design.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| atheek |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 327
Location: Sydney
|
thanks jeff. Going for bindings mode has a distinct advantage...coz it wont affect the network resources...already the channels are taking its toll on the sustem resources  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
It's not going to reduce the processor load. It's just going to move it from the channel agent to weblogic.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| atheek wrote: |
| thanks jeff. Going for bindings mode has a distinct advantage...coz it wont affect the network resources...already the channels are taking its toll on the sustem resources |
There's no measurabble change in network load from bindings to client unless you move the application. The only change is you'll connect via a channel agent & the box's IP stack and you'll need a sensitive monitor to detect that.
The change is there's more software in the link and as jefflowrey points out, that has to be viewed in the wider context of the enterprise design.
IMHO the only killer reason for using bindings is you need XA transaction coordination and can't/won't afford the ETC. But that's an opinion not a fact.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
