| Author |
Message
|
| Blunderbird |
 Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:11 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 28 Oct 2008
Posts: 4
|
@exerk Thanx! I want to get round the use of exits, so I will look into the SSL option in the thread which MQGOT you the mug.
@exerk & @HubertKleinmanns
Any thoughts on using a Gateway cluster with dedicated gateway QMgrs or just gateway QMgrs which are member of alle connecting clusters? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
| Blunderbird wrote: |
@exerk Thanx! I want to get round the use of exits, so I will look into the SSL option in the thread which MQGOT you the mug.
@exerk & @HubertKleinmanns
Any thoughts on using a Gateway cluster with dedicated gateway QMgrs or just gateway QMgrs which are member of alle connecting clusters? |
I would use - at least two, for fail-over - gateway QMgrs in all clusters.
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Blunderbird |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:27 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 28 Oct 2008
Posts: 4
|
[quote="HubertKleinmanns"][quote="Blunderbird"]@exerk Thanx! I want to get round the use of exits, so I will look into the SSL option in the thread which MQGOT you the mug.
@exerk & @HubertKleinmanns
Any thoughts on using a Gateway cluster with dedicated gateway QMgrs or just gateway QMgrs which are member of alle connecting clusters?[/quote]
I would use - at least two, for fail-over - gateway QMgrs in all clusters.[/quote]
My thought exactly. Should the gateway QMgrs form a gateway cluster? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:46 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
| Blunderbird wrote: |
...
My thought exactly. Should the gateway QMgrs form a gateway cluster? |
This only makes sense, when you have (two, for fail-over) gateway QMgrs in first application cluster and in gateway cluster and additional (two, for fail-over) QMgrs in second application cluster and in gateway cluster. This means, you have to set up more gateway QMgrs as without a specific gateway cluster.
I would not use a specifc gateway cluster. Then all gateway QMgrs have simply to be member of every application cluster.
If you want to connect to external customer or something like this, I would not use MQ cluster channel. Instead I would use conventional channels between your MQ cluster and the customer environment (which may be also a MQ cluster).
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:51 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| ...Any notion that suggest that clusters will not form fully connected networks is much more misleading... |
My post did not in any way misleadingly suggest that queue managers in clusters will not form fully connected networks, only that it is possible to restrict the queue managers allowed to do so - it can be controlled, and it should be controlled.
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:29 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| exerk wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| ...Any notion that suggest that clusters will not form fully connected networks is much more misleading... |
My post did not in any way misleadingly suggest that queue managers in clusters will not form fully connected networks, only that it is possible to restrict the queue managers allowed to do so - it can be controlled, and it should be controlled. |
Yes.
We disagree on how.
For what the original poster wants, and in almost all cases, proper selection of cluster topologies, mixed with point to point gateway situations, is a significantly better choice than using an Exit.
As I said, one should use an autodefinition exit to ensure that queue managers that you do not want to join a cluster, are not allowed to. That is, I agree that we do not ignore security. Proper use of SSL and MCAUSers may go a long way towards removing the need for an exit as well.
Do not use Autodefintiion exits to create the same connectivity diagram that you would get with a hub/spoke point-to-point configuration or with proper overlap of clusters.
Exits should always be a point of last resort - we can't do this any other way, so let's use an exit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:48 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| ...Exits should always be a point of last resort - we can't do this any other way, so let's use an exit. |
Now that we can agree on 
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:17 am Post subject: Re: Cluster |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
| exerk wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| ...Exits should always be a point of last resort - we can't do this any other way, so let's use an exit. |
Now that we can agree on |
Me too 
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
