| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Is this staement correct? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| Seagull |
 Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:48 am Post subject: Is this staement correct? |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 05 Feb 2007
Posts: 11
|
Hi All,
MQ and Message Broker - IBM's product does not support automatic failover at this time requiring manual effort to restore. MQ is also Active/Passive and requires an outage to failover (typically experienced an hour).
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
IBM's product can be used with any of the usual suspects in the HA marketplace (Vertias, HACMP, etc) to provide an HA solution. It does not provide internal failover in the same way Oracle, DB2, Websphere, Weblogic, etc do not provide it. v6 does provide additional facilites for manual failover by backing up queue managerss. All versions provide automatic restart and roll-forward in the event of failure. This takes a lot less than an hour on a competantly build & maintained system.
MQ can be run Active / Active using an HA solution.
MQ Clustering is not an HA solution.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
We run WMQ with MSCS and HA/CMP and WMQ/WBIMB with HA/CMP.
Works fine and failover is just the time taken to start the components on the other side of the cluster.
You can't run exactly the same queue manager on both sides of a cluster as active/active but you can have mutual failover between two queue managers and/or two brokers.
If you combine WMQ clustering with hardware clustering you can get true active/active (so I am told since I've never done it).
It's also theorectically possible to use network load balancing against two identical queue managers but I've never tried it.
Look at the IBM support pacs or manuals for more information.
Alternatively use a mainframe queue manager (since one mainframe is about as reliable as a HA unix cluster)!
For 99.999% use two mainframes with Sysplex! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| zpat wrote: |
If you combine WMQ clustering with hardware clustering you can get true active/active (so I am told since I've never done it).
|
You can indeed. A clear diagram & naming convention is essential. 
| zpat wrote: |
Alternatively use a mainframe queue manager (since one mainframe is about as reliable as a HA unix cluster)!
|
Mainframe. Good, solid, heavy metal. 
| zpat wrote: |
For 99.999% use two mainframes with Sysplex! |
2 Sysplex-ed mainframes are that unreliable? Most sys progs would be embarassed.... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| 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
|
|
|
|
