| Author |
Message
|
| dprogwmb |
 Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:45 am Post subject: Question about 2 Brokers in HA in the same server |
 |
|
Voyager
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 96
|
Hi all
I was asked to create 2 broker instances , let's call them "BRK1" and"BRK2" in the same production server each one to support one application,. both under Message Broker 7 version.
But I was also asked to create them using the native HA of Message Broker 7 (with NFS)... but I'm not sure if I share the same path (for example): /var/mqsi/HA (shared with NFS), both Broker Instances will work correctly at the same time? I mean, I the server 1 falls down, would the "Server 2" (Pasive Broker Server) , recover both instances? or will It be a bit "confused" for recognizing each Broker instance? Or do I have to share another file system on NFS?
Will the strategy of sharing the same filesystem for 2 Broker instances in the same server, work?
Any help?
Thanks in advance for your answers...
Regards
Last edited by dprogwmb on Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:06 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:49 am Post subject: Re: Question about 2 Broker instances in HA in the same serv |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| But I was also asked to create them using the native HA of Message Broker 7 (with NFS) |
If you're talking about mulit-instance then it's no different to creating 2 brokers on the same box without multi-instance. So think about how you create 2 brokers & relevant file systems without using NFS, then do that on NFS.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
What possible gain do you expect to receive from having brokers dedicated to single applications?
How is it in any way an improvement for your situation to have two separate brokers, rather than two separate executiongroups?
I can certainly think of good reasons for doing it, myself, but you haven't mentioned any of them yet, and lacking good reason, there is only bad reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dprogwmb |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 96
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
What possible gain do you expect to receive from having brokers dedicated to single applications?
How is it in any way an improvement for your situation to have two separate brokers, rather than two separate executiongroups?
I can certainly think of good reasons for doing it, myself, but you haven't mentioned any of them yet, and lacking good reason, there is only bad reason. |
Because of the criticity of both applications... if I need to restart one application that runs in one Broker instance, then the other application doesn't need to be restarted... so that's why I was asked to have 2 different broker instances. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dprogwmb |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:24 am Post subject: Re: Question about 2 Broker instances in HA in the same serv |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 96
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| But I was also asked to create them using the native HA of Message Broker 7 (with NFS) |
If you're talking about mulit-instance then it's no different to creating 2 brokers on the same box without multi-instance. So think about how you create 2 brokers & relevant file systems without using NFS, then do that on NFS.
|
Let me re-planteate my problem... 
Now Already exists one broker running on multiple instances, but I need to create another broker instace to support the flows of other application... so I was thinking to use the same HA schema (the same file system)of the current Broker Instace... and I was thinking if it could be possible doing that... or that will make me have a lot of troubles?
Regards! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:34 am Post subject: Re: Question about 2 Broker instances in HA in the same serv |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| But I was also asked to create them using the native HA of Message Broker 7 (with NFS) |
If you're talking about mulit-instance then it's no different to creating 2 brokers on the same box without multi-instance. So think about how you create 2 brokers & relevant file systems without using NFS, then do that on NFS.
|
Let me re-planteate my problem...
Now Already exists one broker running on multiple instances, but I need to create another broker instace to support the flows of other application... so I was thinking to use the same HA schema (the same file system)of the current Broker Instace... and I was thinking if it could be possible doing that... or that will make me have a lot of troubles?
Regards! |
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27017319
| Quote: |
| a broker instance can be created only by using the mqsiaddbrokerinstance command. |
Did you read this document?
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dprogwmb |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:37 am Post subject: Re: Question about 2 Broker instances in HA in the same serv |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 96
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| But I was also asked to create them using the native HA of Message Broker 7 (with NFS) |
If you're talking about mulit-instance then it's no different to creating 2 brokers on the same box without multi-instance. So think about how you create 2 brokers & relevant file systems without using NFS, then do that on NFS.
|
Let me re-planteate my problem...
Now Already exists one broker running on multiple instances, but I need to create another broker instace to support the flows of other application... so I was thinking to use the same HA schema (the same file system)of the current Broker Instace... and I was thinking if it could be possible doing that... or that will make me have a lot of troubles?
Regards! |
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg27017319
| Quote: |
| a broker instance can be created only by using the mqsiaddbrokerinstance command. |
Did you read this document? |
Yes, but each broker instance runs on its own queue manager (QM1 and QM2)... and if use the mqsiaddbrokerinstace I'm making both Brokers dependent one for the other (because I would need to use only one QueueManager)... I need to have 2 separete Multi-instance Brokers in one server (one already exists)... and then in the passive server 2 passive instances (one already exists)... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
The document explains the supported configurations. Is the document unclear? If so, what part is not clear?
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
You are confusing "broker instance" with "Broker".
mqsiaddbroker instance creates a standby copy of a Broker.
You are talking about two separate brokers, not two separate instances of the same broker.
That is, you are not talking about
BrokerA(primary)
BrokerA(secondary).
You are talking about
BrokerA(Primary)/BrokerA(secondary)
BrokerB(Primary)/BrokerB(secondary).
You can put only one Primary OR One secondary of the *same* broker on the *same* machine.
You can put as many DIFFERENT brokers, whether or not they are primary or secondaries, on the same machine.
Again, you need to separate the notion of broker instances from the notion of brokers in your own head.
Then it will be clear. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dprogwmb |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:05 am Post subject: Ok, that's my configuration |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 96
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
You are confusing "broker instance" with "Broker".
mqsiaddbroker instance creates a standby copy of a Broker.
You are talking about two separate brokers, not two separate instances of the same broker.
That is, you are not talking about
BrokerA(primary)
BrokerA(secondary).
You are talking about
BrokerA(Primary)/BrokerA(secondary)
BrokerB(Primary)/BrokerB(secondary).
You can put only one Primary OR One secondary of the *same* broker on the *same* machine.
You can put as many DIFFERENT brokers, whether or not they are primary or secondaries, on the same machine.
Again, you need to separate the notion of broker instances from the notion of brokers in your own head.
Then it will be clear. |
Yes, this is my configuration:
BrokerA(Primary)/BrokerA(secondary)
BrokerB(Primary)/BrokerB(secondary)
My question was if BrokerA and BrokerB , can share the same shared filesystem for HA, if there won't be any problems with that?....for example when starting up one Passive Broker ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
What possible gain do you expect to receive from having brokers dedicated to single applications?
How is it in any way an improvement for your situation to have two separate brokers, rather than two separate executiongroups?
I can certainly think of good reasons for doing it, myself, but you haven't mentioned any of them yet, and lacking good reason, there is only bad reason. |
Because of the criticity of both applications... if I need to restart one application that runs in one Broker instance, then the other application doesn't need to be restarted... so that's why I was asked to have 2 different broker instances. |
I am still not convinced that another broker is the answer to your question. Separate execution groups certainly. Remember that both broker will still use the same box resources and follow the same constraints (cpu, io, disk, etc...). If both apps are so critical why don't they budget each for a broker of their own? Might be a hypervisor version for each for all I know... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 11:23 am Post subject: Re: Ok, that's my configuration |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| My question was if BrokerA and BrokerB , can share the same shared filesystem for HA, if there won't be any problems with that?....for example when starting up one Passive Broker ? |
It depends entirely on what you mean by "the same" shared file system.
The answer should be fairly obvious from the documentation.
And, again, the answer here is that it is not a different situation than that of two brokers sharing "the same" file system.
Really, the heart of your question seems to be that you misunderstand what the word "shared" means here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| dprogwmb |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 12:44 pm Post subject: Re: Shared = same path for both Brokers |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Posts: 96
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| My question was if BrokerA and BrokerB , can share the same shared filesystem for HA, if there won't be any problems with that?....for example when starting up one Passive Broker ? |
It depends entirely on what you mean by "the same" shared file system.
The answer should be fairly obvious from the documentation.
And, again, the answer here is that it is not a different situation than that of two brokers sharing "the same" file system.
Really, the heart of your question seems to be that you misunderstand what the word "shared" means here. |
I mean, use the same path of the NFS Server, for both brokers... and when both active Broker fails,then I'm not sure if both Pasive Brokers can be automatically activated together?
Note: One Broker is under version 7.0.1 and the other Broker is under 7.0.2 version. (I didn't bought the technical Broker team of my client company...hoho... orders are orders)
Regards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:03 pm Post subject: Re: Shared = same path for both Brokers |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| I'm not sure if both Pasive Brokers can be automatically activated together? |
Again, if you need this, then you do not need two Brokers.
However, yes, it is possible to do this. There are many ways to make it happen. I leave this as an exercise to the reader.
| dprogwmb wrote: |
| Note: One Broker is under version 7.0.1 and the other Broker is under 7.0.2 version. (I didn't bought the technical Broker team of my client company...hoho... orders are orders) |
Are they paying you to follow orders or to know what you're doing?
If they are paying you to follow orders, then why are you asking us how to do this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
