| Author |
Message
|
| kimmyj |
 Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:31 am Post subject: more than 1 queue manager with the same name |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 19
Location: UK
|
Can more than 1 queue manager with the same name (on different servers) read from the same queues (if reading a shared disk).
Is that a stupid question?
We are trying to think about the best way to set up a cluster of queue managers in the MSCS sense (not in the MQ sense) and all we want the getting and putting applications to see is a single queue manager/ip address (instead of multiple qms and ip addresses)
One of the apps is biztalk connecting via the bt mq adapter. So you have to specify connections for each queue you want to get and put in Biztalk.
Does this make sense?
Also - how does MQ take advantage of multiprocessor machines? Will it open multiple channels/threads to process the messages as quickly as the machine will allow??
Thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:37 am Post subject: Re: more than 1 queue manager with the same name |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
| kimmyj wrote: |
Can more than 1 queue manager with the same name (on different servers) read from the same queues (if reading a shared disk).
Is that a stupid question?
|
Not a stupid question, but currently only supported via Shared Queues on the z/OS version.
so if you happen to have a couple mainframes with a coupling facility around, your in the game 
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
what about in an active/active hardware failover cluster ?
I think this is truely what his question is:
If they establish a hardware failover cluster and run it as active active will this achieve load balancing as well as failover, both qmgrs using the same qmgr name and queues.?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimmyj |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 19
Location: UK
|
Ahh OK so that is the shared queuing.....what a shame its only on zOS.
Thanks for answering my question though - I guess that rules that design out and its back to plan B 
... which is active active failover with ms doing the load balancing but then how to specify the queue manager that an app puts to or gets from to ensure all the messages are processed.... its like we need a virtual queue manager or can we specify queue manager aliases..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
You can create 2 qmgrs qmgrA and qmgrB
on B you can create an alias for qmgrC(virtual)
on A you can create an alias for qmgrC(Virtual)
Now if a message for qmgrC comes accross qmgrA or qmgrB it will get consumed by the qmgr it comes accross as if it were destined for him.
This has the advantage of allowing you to talk between A and B using their real (non virtual) IP.
Anything outside the HW cluster should address qmgrC(Virtual)
Enjoy  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kimmyj |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 19
Location: UK
|
superb - thanks I will try that.
It should work in an mscs cluster of 4 qmgrs - was going to use mscs for load balancing and possibly failover so the putting app goes for alias at v.ip and the getting app gets from alias at v.ip
My only concern is about processing msgs on the queue that the app gets from is FIFO - how can i be sure that the messages from all the queue managers will be processed in a timely manner? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
For true failover your qmgrs should be sharing the same file system under /var/mqm.
There is some documentation about how to set up a true failover in a hardware cluster. Check out under "High Availability" and do a site search here as it is referenced in other posts.
Enjoy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
We have a QM running in MSCS supporting BizTalk clients.
Server1 and Server2 are your hardwared clustered servers. Create QMBIZTALK on Server1. Migrate the QM to the shared disk, and fail the QM back and forth. The QM is now known to both nodes.
The applications code the shared network name in their hostname calls to the QM. The shared name is owned by the MSCS, and will route the messages to whatever server the QM is actually running on. The applications do not know or care whether they connected to the QM on Server1 or 2.
This is known as an Active Passive, or an Active Standby design. It works. You only need 1 QM, that floats between the 2 servers.
You have to install the Biztalk MQS agent on both nodes if the BizTalk clients are on separate app servers.
You need the MSDTC Resource to be under MSCS's control. The actual MQS Agent is *NOT* under MSCS control. The early BizTalk documentation is WRONG on this point. The MQSAgent simply needs to be installed on both nodes and configured identically. The MSDTC Resource will take care of the rest.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
