| Author |
Message
|
| MQ_NEWB |
 Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 1:46 pm Post subject: MQ Clustering... SW Failover??? |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 2
|
OK before I get flamed I have been going over this board the past couple days and have read some things that have confused me a bit. I have been dropped into an evironment where I have to help with the design of a MQ architechture w/no MQ experience... (gotta love consulting)
My requirements are as follows:
I have a application that transmits xml messages across a secure link to a Offsite application provider who will process the message and send it back to our shop and be picked up by the app and presented to the end users web browser. Its synchronous and the web app expects a response within 15 seconds.
Sounds straight forward. Here is the problem. Everything I have read says that MQ alonedoes not provide HA or Failover, only a type of load balancing between two QM's via a bridgehead type of QM that simply passess messages to the two underling QM's. (UQM1 & UQM2)
so if i have this "bridgehead" QM on server1 with UQM1 and UQM2 on server2 under any circumstances if server 1 failed would processing continue on server2?
I am pushing for MSCS but I just need to be sure that is the correct approach and that I am on the right path. Clients main concern of course is the cost of a cluster and the fact u have a server doing lil to nothing.
Your thoughts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2004 1:56 pm Post subject: Re: MQ Clustering... SW Failover??? |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2602
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| MQ_NEWB wrote: |
My requirements are as follows:
I have a application that transmits xml messages across a secure link to a Offsite application provider who will process the message and send it back to our shop and be picked up by the app and presented to the end users web browser. Its synchronous and the web app expects a response within 15 seconds. |
Can you elaborate on this?
my first question would be: what kind of information is transmitted, why does the user require a 15 second response, what information is in the response...
Too many times I get this type of requirement for synchronous processing, just because... (we're used to it... bla bla...)
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqonnet |
| Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 1114
Location: Boston, Ma, Usa.
|
"so if i have this "bridgehead" QM on server1 with UQM1 and UQM2 on server2 under any circumstances if server 1 failed would processing continue on server2? "
---No it wont. If your app is connected to "bridgehead" qm and the server fails there is no way you could connect to server1's qms unless of course you are using client channel table and you have all client channel defs defined and app coded appropriately. But again this is an extreme option that came to my mind and it would defeat the whole purpose of using clusters, since you are doing the load-balancing by yourself in your apps.
"I am pushing for MSCS but I just need to be sure that is the correct approach and that I am on the right path. Clients main concern of course is the cost of a cluster and the fact u have a server doing lil to nothing. "
---Might be the appropriate solutino in your case.
If you search clustering topic on this forum you would find excellent discussions on how could you cluster your qms, doubts on h/w clustering etc cleared.
Cheers
Kumar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MQ_NEWB |
| Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 2
|
The data being transmitted is of a financial nature and the app works the way the programmers have developed it. They have given me the specs on their apps and now it is up to me to provide them with a Highly Available / Redundant MQ Infrastructure. I can only tell you what I know, but my main question remains.
Can this be accomplished in any way or in any capacity via just MQ Clustering w/multiple servers?
Or
Will I have to throw hardware at the requirements and use MSCS?
This is what I mainly need validation of, as I am pushing for MSCS and the client is pushing for MQ Clustering.
Again thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Ratan |
| Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 18 Jul 2002
Posts: 1245
|
MQ Clustering is not a High Availability Solution. It is for Load balancing and easing up the administrative tasks.
Your scenario makes more sense to use MSCS for me.
_________________
-Ratan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| koami |
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 28 Apr 2004
Posts: 10
Location: San Marcos, California - USA
|
I think you can still use MQClustering for load distribution and HACMP your gateway(bridgehead) QM if you are using AIX.
HACMP can be configured to failover the server to the backup server or restart the QM on the same server if the QM is unavailable for some reasons.
Hope this helps.
What is MSCS by the way?
_________________
Koami Acolatse
IBM Certified WebSphere MQ Solution Expert
koami@rs6kconsulting.com
www.rs6kconsulting.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2004 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7717
|
| Quote: |
What is MSCS by the way?
|
MicroSoft Cluster Service. Its how you make two Windows machines Highly Available 
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
