| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| MQMFT QueueManagers |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| vishBroker |
 Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 5:56 am Post subject: MQMFT QueueManagers |
 |
|
Centurion
Joined: 08 Dec 2010
Posts: 135
|
Hi,
I am looking for some guidance/best practices regarding MQMFT.
Typically speaking we need 3 QM roles [ Coordination QM, Command QM and Agent QM] - As I understand, we can have -
1. One QM [Say QM1] configured as all the three
or
2. One QM [QM1] Configured as Command and Coordination and QM2 configured as Agent QM
or
3. One QM[QM1] configured as Command and Agent QM and QM2 as Coordination QM
or
4. One QM[QM1] configured as Coordination and Agent QM and QM2 as Command QM
or
5. 3 different QMs one each for Command, CoOrdination and Agent QM.
In short - any combination.
Question - what is recommended approach/best practice?
With my modest knowledge of MQ - if we have more QMs - we need to account for connection among them[sender/receiver channels, xmit queues].
That tells me, it is better to combine roles - if possible.
[Also, it be better to have less QMs in the infrastructure]
SO, if we want to combine the roles then which two roles should be combined together.
In one of the project - I have seen Command and Coordination QMs are combined. And in another I saw that Command and Agent are combined.
Looking for somebody to show me the path.
[Apologies if rambling a lot] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| vishBroker |
| Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2017 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 08 Dec 2010
Posts: 135
|
I am looking for what should be 'driving factors' to take the decision.
1. What artifacts are created internally in the QM when it becomes CoOrdination QM and when it becomes Command QM.
This might give some insight on whether to combine them or when one should think of keeping them separate.
2. I also have IIB QM. So, I am planning to use IIB QM as coordination QM and create another QM[Say MFTQM ] which will play role of Command and Agent QM.
Both the QMs [IIBQM and MFTQM] will be on separate machine.
Thoughts/inputs are most welcome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2538
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
We have been using this design for many years:
1. One QM configured as Coordination QM for all agents. This simplifies agent configuration, and all status and info about all agents is in the one place.
2. For each agent, a QM is configured as both its Command QM and Agent QM. This can be the same as the Coord QM, but we use many different QMs.
All agents can have their Command and Agent queues on the same QM, and connect using Client from their individual hosts. This simplifies the MQ connectivity and message routing.
Whatever design you choose, it will probably stick around for a long time, so make sure all the scalability and reliability requirements are factored in.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2538
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
>1. What artifacts are created internally in the QM when it becomes CoOrdination QM
None. It only does MQ pub/sub.
>and when it becomes Command QM.
Local queues. When you run the command to create an agent, it spits out the MQSC commands that you need to run to define the required queues.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| vishBroker |
| Posted: Tue Aug 15, 2017 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 08 Dec 2010
Posts: 135
|
Thanks Glenn for the response.
[I was on vacation - hence delay in replying and thanking]
Well - we have decided to create separate QMs for each role [coordination, command and agent].
I would like to slightly correct your statement.
When a QM becomes Command QM - no artifacts are created.
The local queues [as you mentioned] will be created when a QM becomes Agent QM => When MQSC commands [which get created after running fteCreateAgent] are run against the Agent QM.
But, I got what you are saying. Thanks. |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
