| Author |
Message
|
| Sonal |
 Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:56 am Post subject: ESB - single point of failure |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Mar 2009
Posts: 45
|
How does an ESB address the problem of single point of failure?
How does a combo of MQ+MB deals with this issue? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| WMBDEV1 |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sentinel
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 888
Location: UK
|
Horizontal scaling for broker and MQ, help remove SPOFs.
For example MQ has clustered queues so there is not only one possible destination for the message to go to be processed. This means that if one QM hosting the q becomes unavailable, it can still be routed to another QM that is still available. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| WMBDEV1 |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sentinel
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 888
Location: UK
|
The weirdest thing happened with my previous post....
For "contact admin" I actually wrote M Q help (without spaces in the M Q).
Please substitute this in accordingly until someone fixes it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Sonal |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Mar 2009
Posts: 45
|
Horizontal scaling for broker and contact admin remove SPOFs.
Can you please elaborate over this?
Many thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| WMBDEV1 |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sentinel
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 888
Location: UK
|
| Did you do any searching for help on MQ clusters / horizontal scaling? before coming back to me for help? If so what did you find and why was this not helpful? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| WMBDEV1 wrote: |
| Did you do any searching for help on MQ clusters / horizontal scaling? before coming back to me for help? |
If you check this poster's history, you'll notice a lot of general questions and spoonfeeding requests. I can only assume the recent increase in activity means the certification exam is soon..... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Sonal |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Mar 2009
Posts: 45
|
Thanks experts!
I went thru' it... i mean Red Books... but then wouldnt it be too expensive? Clustering, i mean? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Sonal wrote: |
| then wouldnt it be too expensive? Clustering, i mean? |
Depends what you mean by "too expensive". In the context of your original (and unbelievibly basic) question, the cost of removing a SPOF needs to be balanced against how much your business will lose while the system is down.
You'll find this discussed a lot as well. Try looking for answers to your questions before simply posting them here.
This is also sounding a lot like this, with the question changed from "how do I justify the cost of WMQ to my management" to "how to I justify the cost of removing SPOF & using clustering to my management".
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| manicminer |
| Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Disciple
Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Posts: 177
|
Quite how you expect to remove a single point of failure without extra resources (which inherently cost money) I don't understand
_________________
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
