| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| MQ Base Broker - RFH |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| kayoumt |
 Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:28 pm Post subject: MQ Base Broker - RFH |
 |
|
Voyager
Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 81
|
Hello ! I'm still there.
I have two questions one (more strategical than technical) on MQ Base Broker and one (more technical than strategical) on RFH.
1) MQ Base broker
Is MQ Base broker a product that could be released for a commercial software ? What are limits of that broker in terms of speed, maximum number of subscribes, maximum number of connections, etc ... ?
The story. I met 1 year ago an IBM representative. I explained him my messaging needs. He automatically tried to convince me that I have to purchase something called Event Broker or Message Broker. I demonstrated him that Base Broker + RFH pub/sub functionnality can do the job for what I needed ; and, so far, it does the job, but I have no idea on the performance limits.
The real business part of the story is : Event or Message broker license cost per CPU is at least twice of the price I was planning to sale my software (MQ included).
2) RFH/PCF
I saw lot of documentation telling that an MQ application using RFH/PCF pub/sub broker commands will automatically unregister its subscribes and have pub/sub reply queues (if they are temporary dynamic queues) closed on shutdown. I tried to code that architecture. It's exact that Temporary dynamic queues automatically close. But, subscriptions remain in broker and DLQ catches all the "zombie" publishes that were addressed to non-properly shutdowned applications.
Could someone help me correct my RFH/PCF command (sample below) or tell me if it is possible for an application to unsuscribe all its subcribes by just giving its subscribe-id to the broker ?
The RFH/PCF Subscription sample (below) :
MQPSCommand RegSub
MQPSQMgrName QM_CADS6
MQPSRegOpts CorrelAsId
MQPSRegOpts NonPers
MQPSQName CADS6.192.168.2.10_2007.10.25_00.13.48.PS
MQPSTopic 1/PS/192.168.2.10_2007.10.25_00.13.48
Thanks in advance for any help ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
You should code and sell your software to a) not include any broker at all, b) work with either MB or MQ base pub/sub
A good way to do b) is to use XMS instead of the plain MQ API.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kayoumt |
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Posts: 81
|
Thank you for reply jefflowrey,
a) not include any broker at all
My MQ and pub/stuff stuff is wrapped in a DLL. My business logic does not know if it is dealing with MQ, SONIC or FIORANO. Changine the way I do messaging and pub/sub will not be a big issue. Just changing the content of that DLL without changing the API interface (classes, methods, members), it will work.
RFH is a legacy I inherited from my first MQ proof of concepts. At that time, I was coding in VB6. It is low level ; but has also the advantage to be true MQ solution and not very third-party-dependant ; that helps easily understand how MQ works.
b) work with either MB or MQ base pub/sub
I have no problem with that. What I'm trying to understand is how tough is MQ Base ? What I'm trying to avoid is to sell my software to a customer with MQ Base (9000$) and return back to him 3 days after ask him to upgrade to Message or Event Broker (38 000$) because I realize that MQ Base Broker does not do the job.
Yeap ! I'm looking at XMS. I will probably use it for mean term next releases of my softwares. For short terme release, I need to have answers to my MB Brokers/RFH questions.
Thanks again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
You should be able to get numbers on the performance of the two different brokers from the performance reports for MQ and Broker.
Event Broker is lower cost than Message Broker (but still more than MQ).
EB/MB have always been significantly better performing per instance than the MQ broker. That's been the main selling point of EB - that it's a high performance pub/sub broker, with additional security features.
Depending on what they're willing to support, a customer may be able to get a high volume pub/sub setup by using LOTS of MQ base brokers. But then it's complicated and takes management and etc.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
