| Author |
Message
|
| rajeshavrs |
 Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:21 pm Post subject: REAL Load Balancing utilizing the MQ clusters |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
|
Hello all,
We have a very straight forward Websphere MQ clustering scenario. Qmgr1 is running on Box1 and Qmgr2 is running on Box2. We have 14,000 MQ clients that connect to these two queue managers. We use MQ Channel TAB files for achieving FailOver and this setup has worked wonderfully for three years. What I meant is if Qmgr1 is not available, all the clients had failed over to Qmgr2. Since the setup is a Primary/Secondary model, the clients always connect to Qmgr1, if it is available. This means, NO load on Qmgr2 if Qmgr1 is available.
I want to re-architect the solution where the resources n both Box1 and Box2 are utilized equally.
The current plan I have in mind is create TWO channel TAB files. First channel TAB file first entry would be pointing to Qmgr1 and second channel TAB file first entry would be pointing to Qmgr2. Of 14,000 clients, I want to distribute the first file to 7,000 and the second to the rest of 7,000. I have tested the scenario in my development environment and the failover works fine and the load is shared across Qmgr1 and Qmgr2 almost equally.
My concern is that, in this approach, I am achieving the load balancing by static means, which is not good from a maintenance perspective. Is there a simple (or any kind of) configuration by which I can distribute the same Channel TAB file to all the 14,000 clients but load balancing is done by the system dynamically??
I have thought of the gateway approach where in I will have Qmgr3 and all the clients connect to Qmgr3 and which inturn distributes the load to Qmgr1 and Qmgr2. But recently we had an outage situation where Qmgr3 could not take the load of 14,000 clients and went to a hung state. So this approach is not good either.
I welcome any comments on this architecture and any alternate suggestions to achieve the real load balancing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
Have you considered a channel exit?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rajeshavrs |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
|
You mean channel exit at the Server Connection Level?
How will this work? If I define the exit on a channel on Qmgr1, the Queue Manager has to still take the load from all the 14,000 clients right?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| rajeshavrs wrote: |
| If I define the exit on a channel on Qmgr1, the Queue Manager has to still take the load from all the 14,000 clients right? |
Why? 
What happens if the exit instructs the channel to fail?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rajeshavrs |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
|
Jeff,
Could you please elaborate? I think I am not getting a clear picture.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| rajeshavrs wrote: |
| Could you please elaborate? I think I am not getting a clear picture. |
I'm not going to elaborate too much more.
Consider an exit that is designed to accept only every 4th connection attempt.
What does your client app do, if the connection to the first queue manager it knows about doesn't succeed?
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rajeshavrs |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 10
|
That's a nice trick 
But won't this approach increase the network traffic interms of sending too many requests to the Queue Managers? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I'm sure you'll figure something out.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
