| Author |
Message
|
| smdavies99 |
 Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:50 am Post subject: Active/Passive Channels to an Active/Active setup |
 |
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
We have to connect an Active/Passive setup to an Active/Active one.
If I add a second destination into the SDR Channel config that will handle the issue of the 1st node in the Active/Active setup failing but AFAIK, it will still require some manual intervention because the Channel Sequence number will be wrong.
Is there some way to get around this?
The Active/Active end is an MQ Cluster. The Active/Passive side is in a different company from the Active/Active one. I've never had to deal with Active/Active before (shame on me  )and it has been a very long time since I dabbled with MQ Clusters ( even deeper shame  )
Thoughts most welcome.
_________________
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 |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Two channels ... ?
An active/active really means two separate queue managers. So it should be treated as two queue managers, yes?
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 5:33 am Post subject: Re: Active/Passive Channels to an Active/Active setup |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
We have to connect an Active/Passive setup to an Active/Active one.
If I add a second destination into the SDR Channel config that will handle the issue of the 1st node in the Active/Active setup failing but AFAIK, it will still require some manual intervention because the Channel Sequence number will be wrong.
Is there some way to get around this?
The Active/Active end is an MQ Cluster. The Active/Passive side is in a different company from the Active/Active one. I've never had to deal with Active/Active before (shame on me )and it has been a very long time since I dabbled with MQ Clusters ( even deeper shame )
Thoughts most welcome. |
I don't quite understand your comment about the channel sequence number being wrong.
The point here is the channel sequence number would be wrong when you change the conname. Once it is set and if the data and log files follow the queue manager on failover there should be no problem.
I hope that your active / active really means QM1 on host1 /host2 and QM2 on host2/host1.
So you would never have the same queue manager active on both hosts at the same time...
The whole purpose of having multiple entries in the conname is to avoid a channel sequence discrepancy... as it is the same queue manager on the other side... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
Hmmmm.....
So AP-QM is talking over channel AP.TO.AAQM1 and the host of AAQM1 goes down.
How do you make sure that the data that was going to AAQM1 which by now is on the Transmission Queue for AP.TO.AAQM1 gets sent to AAQM2?
AFAIK, you put the connection data for AAQM2 in the SDR Channel definition and as long as there was a receiver channel correctly setup on AAQM2 it should work other than the Sequence number. This appears to be wrong. so..
How do you configure the Active PAssive side to send messages to whichever of the Active Active nodes are up and running? AND get some sort of failover when one of the AA Queue Managers is taken down?
_________________
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 |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| How do you make sure that the data that was going to AAQM1 which by now is on the Transmission Queue for AP.TO.AAQM1 gets sent to AAQM2? |
You don't.
If they've created an Active/Active setup where both queue managers are not HA in some way, then they don't care if messages don't get to AP.TO.AAQM1 until they've restored it to running state.
If they have, then either they're using a virtual IP or an MI queue manager, in which case the channel will reconnect.
The first option is not your problem.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
Hmmmm.....
So AP-QM is talking over channel AP.TO.AAQM1 and the host of AAQM1 goes down.
How do you make sure that the data that was going to AAQM1 which by now is on the Transmission Queue for AP.TO.AAQM1 gets sent to AAQM2?
AFAIK, you put the connection data for AAQM2 in the SDR Channel definition and as long as there was a receiver channel correctly setup on AAQM2 it should work other than the Sequence number. This appears to be wrong. so..
How do you configure the Active PAssive side to send messages to whichever of the Active Active nodes are up and running? AND get some sort of failover when one of the AA Queue Managers is taken down? |
If you really want to send the messages to QM2 as a failover to QM1 you can do following:
For the same xmitq create 2 channels. One to QM1 the other to QM2.
In the XMITQ trigger data set the channel name.
So when QM1 is unavailable, stop the channel, (resolve it, if in doubt) switch the channel in the xmitq trigger data and start the channel to QM2. All messages waiting on the xmitq will now go to QM2... No channel sequence to worry about...
Have fun
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bruce2359 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 9469
Location: US: west coast, almost. Otherwise, enroute.
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| smdavies99 wrote: |
Hmmmm.....
So AP-QM is talking over channel AP.TO.AAQM1 and the host of AAQM1 goes down.
How do you make sure that the data that was going to AAQM1 which by now is on the Transmission Queue for AP.TO.AAQM1 gets sent to AAQM2?
AFAIK, you put the connection data for AAQM2 in the SDR Channel definition and as long as there was a receiver channel correctly setup on AAQM2 it should work other than the Sequence number. This appears to be wrong. so..
How do you configure the Active PAssive side to send messages to whichever of the Active Active nodes are up and running? AND get some sort of failover when one of the AA Queue Managers is taken down? |
If you really want to send the messages to QM2 as a failover to QM1 you can do following:
For the same xmitq create 2 channels. One to QM1 the other to QM2.
In the XMITQ trigger data set the channel name.
So when QM1 is unavailable, stop the channel, (resolve it, if in doubt) switch the channel in the xmitq trigger data and start the channel to QM2. All messages waiting on the xmitq will now go to QM2... No channel sequence to worry about...
Have fun |
Another method:
Implement an mq cluster. Give QM2 clusrcvr channel a lower channel rank than QM1 clusrcvr channel. If/when QM1 fails, messages will go to QM1.
_________________
I like deadlines. I like to wave as they pass by.
ב''ה
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, Lex Vivendi. As we Worship, So we Believe, So we Live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| bruce2359 wrote: |
Another method:
Implement an mq cluster. Give QM2 clusrcvr channel a lower channel rank than QM1 clusrcvr channel. If/when QM1 fails, messages will go to QM1. |
| smdavies99 wrote: |
| The Active/Passive side is in a different company from the Active/Active one. |
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 4:02 pm Post subject: Re: Active/Passive Channels to an Active/Active setup |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| smdavies99 wrote: |
The Active/Active end is an MQ Cluster. The Active/Passive side is in a different company from the Active/Active one. |
You have to nominate one of the QMs in the MQ Cluster, either an existing one or a new one, as a Gateway / Edge Queue Manager. It is the single point of ingress and egress to the MQ Cluster from the other company. You have to make the single Gateway / Edge QM as highly available as you need to. You may decide that QM built on a single virtual server is H.A. enough, with all the magic that virtualization brings you, and inherent increased stability due to the simple set up. Or you may decide that QM needs to be a Multi Instance QM able to "float" between 2 servers, but only ever active on one server. Or make it a classic H.A. QM using VCS or HACAMP or MSCS. Or get yourself a pair of MQ Appliances to host that queue manager.
Any solution that relies on the partner QM trying to use multiple QMs via the same XMITQ and/or SNDR channel involves either manually or automatically via script overriding channel sequence errors, messages in doubt, changing which channel uses the XMITQ, etc. All doable via script to be automatic (typically if ain't automatic, it aint H.A.) but man, I gotta say if it was a good idea, why hasn't IBM officially offered this type of thing years ago. Because I suspect its fraught with unforeseen gotchas, namely the potential for missing messages or duplicate messages.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2016 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
Thanks Peter. Your post actually mirrored much of my thinking.
The problem comes in getting the Gateway QMGR etc setup.
_________________
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 |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2016 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Again, I am of the opinion that if each of the Active/Active queue managers is not HA, then it is not your problem if messages get stuck in xmitqs on your side.
It's a direct consequence of their architecture. If they want you to work around that, then they should provide the necessary scripting or instructions on how to do it.
And no matter what, you should have all communications with them going through a gateway queue manager. With as much security as you can stick onto in order to lock them out of the rest of your network.
_________________
chmod -R ugo-wx / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
