| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| gag_nm |
 Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:14 am Post subject: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 102
|
Dears,
can we have 3 Environments (DEV,UAT,Staging) in one Broker(6.1) on Same Machine(AIX).
Do I need to install multiple brokers on Same Machine for each Environment ?.
Can some one Help meee.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 5:30 am Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| gag_nm wrote: |
| can we have 3 Environments (DEV,UAT,Staging) in one Broker(6.1) on Same Machine(AIX). |
Yes, if you want to, subject to resource constrictions and all your eggs being in one basket.
| gag_nm wrote: |
| Do I need to install multiple brokers on Same Machine for each Environment ?. |
You can. Or you can have execution groups called DEV<real EG name>, UAT<real EG name>, etc.
It's your set up, you can use it how you want. You could install multiple brokers and use one for each of your business units if you decide it's a good idea.
Don't ask us what's best for you; we don't know a thing about your site.
| gag_nm wrote: |
| Can some one Help meee.. |
You can help yourself by moving off WMBv6.1. Or at least having a plan too.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 5:38 am Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
| Vitor wrote: |
You can. Or you can have execution groups called DEV<real EG name>, UAT<real EG name>, etc.
|
How would you make sure that the messages destined for Flow_A/EG_DEV were read by the flow and not Flow_A/EG_UAT
Remember that the EG's all share the same Queue Manager.
Therefore, IMHO it is better to have separate Brokers for DEV, UAT. This way, you can be sure that there is separation at the WMQ level.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 5:43 am Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
You can. Or you can have execution groups called DEV<real EG name>, UAT<real EG name>, etc.
|
How would you make sure that the messages destined for Flow_A/EG_DEV were read by the flow and not Flow_A/EG_UAT
Remember that the EG's all share the same Queue Manager. |
By having queues / URLs / directories / file names likewise prefixed.
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| Therefore, IMHO it is better to have separate Brokers for DEV, UAT. This way, you can be sure that there is separation at the WMQ level. |
Subject to resource constrictions I'd do it that way as well. But you can do it the other way.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kash3338 |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:11 am Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 709
Location: Chennai, India
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
How would you make sure that the messages destined for Flow_A/EG_DEV were read by the flow and not Flow_A/EG_UAT
Remember that the EG's all share the same Queue Manager.
Therefore, IMHO it is better to have separate Brokers for DEV, UAT. This way, you can be sure that there is separation at the WMQ level. |
We can do it by stopping the flows in DEV while doing a UAT and so on. A flow cant be tested in both the env's at the same time (in most cases). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:50 am Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| kash3338 wrote: |
| smdavies99 wrote: |
How would you make sure that the messages destined for Flow_A/EG_DEV were read by the flow and not Flow_A/EG_UAT
Remember that the EG's all share the same Queue Manager.
Therefore, IMHO it is better to have separate Brokers for DEV, UAT. This way, you can be sure that there is separation at the WMQ level. |
We can do it by stopping the flows in DEV while doing a UAT and so on. A flow cant be tested in both the env's at the same time (in most cases). |
And as my associate points out, that puts the onus on your control procedures to ensure the correct flow is active so that the data is routed to the right version.
It also (IMHO) is going to be a pain in the neck doing it that way as it means you have to stop UAT so the developers can have a turn, and stop development so that you can run a UAT cycle. That's got to be disruptive.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kash3338 |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:59 pm Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 709
Location: Chennai, India
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| It also (IMHO) is going to be a pain in the neck doing it that way as it means you have to stop UAT so the developers can have a turn, and stop development so that you can run a UAT cycle. That's got to be disruptive. |
Certainly agree to this. Just a suggestion given that there are few resource constraints. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqsiuser |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 10:59 pm Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 637
Location: Germany
|
| Vitor wrote: |
By having queues / URLs / directories / file names likewise prefixed.
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| Therefore, IMHO it is better to have separate Brokers for DEV, UAT. This way, you can be sure that there is separation at the WMQ level. |
Subject to resource constrictions I'd do it that way as well. But you can do it the other way. |
So both is possible. Here is a sample of separation on queue-level:
<Environment>.<Source(System)>.<Target(System)>[.<DataType and/or Usage>][.<further usage>][.<Direction/Flow of Data>][".BACKOUT", ".CACHE" or other]
"[]" means optional
e.g. Environment = D1234 (D = Development, 1 = Major project version, 2 = Minor project version, 3 & 4: Further (defined) usage).
D1234.SAP1.SAP2.ORD.REQ (ORD = Order, REQ = Request)
U1234.SAP1.SAP2.ORD.OUT (U = UAT, MAT = Material Master)
PROD.SAP1.SAP2.MAT.TRANSFER.OUT (PROD = Production, there is probably only one: so this is a slight variation)
PROD.SAP1.SAP2.MAT.TRANSFER.OUT.BACKOUT (a BACKOUT queue)
For queue names you have 48 characters available. So you may (or may not) be more generous (ORD -> ORDER, MAT -> MATERIAL).
_________________
Just use REFERENCEs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kash3338 |
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:28 pm Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 709
Location: Chennai, India
|
| mqsiuser wrote: |
So both is possible. Here is a sample of separation on queue-level:
<Environment>.<Source(System)>.<Target(System)>[.<DataType and/or Usage>][.<further usage>][.<Direction/Flow of Data>][".BACKOUT", ".CACHE" or other]
|
But in general we go for Alias queues in in all flows and only the physical queues have these ENV specified in the name. The Alias queue name has the same name for all ENV's.
Hence by this approach of having diff environments in diff exg groups in same broker is not a good approach. Therefore the below quote from smdavies99 holds good,
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| Therefore, IMHO it is better to have separate Brokers for DEV, UAT. This way, you can be sure that there is separation at the WMQ level. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqsiuser |
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:39 am Post subject: Re: DEV ,UAT, Staging in Message Broker 6.1 |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 637
Location: Germany
|
| kash3338 wrote: |
| But in general we go for Alias queues in in all flows and only the physical queues have these ENV specified in the name. The Alias queue name has the same name for all ENV's. |
In order for environments to work based on a env-prefixes (which is included in the queue-name) you have to put it (the prefix) into all relevant places (including alias queues). If this is prevented by a (company) policy then you have to trade things: Having dedicated hardware/installations/queuemanagers/brokers (and full/physical) isolation v.s. software isolation (and the potential to have a lot of environments, e.g. 50 (if you need them)). Depends on the projects requirements and constraints. |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
