| Author |
Message
|
| Blomman |
 Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:25 am Post subject: WMB 6.1-> WMQ 6 cluster |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 230
|
Hi all!
One simple question ithink...
Is it possible to have WMB 6.1 and use a WMQ cluster with 2 qmangers as the broker qmanager/s?
If so how do i "expose" the WMQ cluster as one public ip(Qmanager)?
Ciao!
//Michael |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
Each Broker can only have one Queue Manager.
Each Queue Manager can only have one Broker.
You could use a Hardware clustering solution to have 1 QM/Broker fronted by a VIP.
You can have multiple hardware clustered QM/Brokers inside an MQ cluster.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Blomman |
| Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 230
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
Each Broker can only have one Queue Manager.
Each Queue Manager can only have one Broker.
You could use a Hardware clustering solution to have 1 QM/Broker fronted by a VIP.
You can have multiple hardware clustered QM/Brokers inside an MQ cluster. |
Ok i have 2 hardware clustered Qmanagers, if i want to collerate them with one WMB, how? Using an Hardware load balancer?
//Michael |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
You could also use one or multiple gateway qmgrs with a channel table for failover... ? That is if your brokers are also in an MQ Cluster.
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| Blomman wrote: |
Ok i have 2 hardware clustered Qmanagers, if i want to collerate them with one WMB, how? Using an Hardware load balancer?
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
Each Broker can only have one Queue Manager.
Each Queue Manager can only have one Broker.
|
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Blomman |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 230
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| You could also use one or multiple gateway qmgrs with a channel table for failover... ? That is if your brokers are also in an MQ Cluster. |
How are my Brokers in an mq cluster?
If my Broker qmanager are, then my broker are aswell?
//Michael |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Blomman |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 230
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| Blomman wrote: |
Ok i have 2 hardware clustered Qmanagers, if i want to collerate them with one WMB, how? Using an Hardware load balancer?
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
Each Broker can only have one Queue Manager.
Each Queue Manager can only have one Broker.
|
|
| Quote: |
You can have multiple hardware clustered QM/Brokers inside an MQ cluster
|
Whats the point of having this then if i cant attach a WMB to them.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
A broker needs a QM. A QM can be put in an MQ cluster and/or a hardware cluster. Therefore if the Broker's QM is clustered, so is the Broker.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Blomman |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 230
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
A broker needs a QM. A QM can be put in an MQ cluster and/or a hardware cluster. Therefore if the Broker's QM is clustered, so is the Broker. |
Ok so u mean that in your case im running two brokers with one qmanager each in an hardware cluster?
Toooo expensive due to the broker licence for an active broker is ok, but running two is to expensive....
What about the flows then? On which broker skould they be deployed and how should i replicate them to the secondary broker?
How would my solution look like if one was an warm standby...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Active / Active HA cluster and MQ cluster for load balancing...
Enjoy 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
OK, one more time - A broker and a QM are a one to one relationship.
In an Active / Passive set up, you install MQ and WMB on both nodes. There is only 1 QM and only 1 Broker and only 1 Broker DB that can run on only 1 node or the other.
There is no such thing as a true Active/Avtive MQ hardware cluster. A QM can only run on a single node. You can have 2 seperate QMs, each with a different names than the other QM, each with their own broker (each Broker a different name than the other Broker) running on a 2 node cluster. This is more properly known as an overlapping Active Passive cluster. When things are normal, each node runs one QM/Broker. When one node fails, the remaining node better have the horsepower to support two QMs and Brokers.
Please read this before replying:Understanding high availability with WebSphere MQ
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| PeterPotkay wrote: |
| You can have 2 seperate QMs, each with a different names than the other QM, each with their own broker (each Broker a different name than the other Broker) running on a 2 node cluster. This is more properly known as an overlapping Active Passive cluster. When things are normal, each node runs one QM/Broker. When one node fails, the remaining node better have the horsepower to support two QMs and Brokers. |
That's exactly what I had in mind... Add another 2 qmgrs to the mix as gateway qmgr (great for broker isolation). No need to have them HA clustered, a client channel table would do for failover. You can now load balance your brokers...
But then maybe the customer does not need / want that much redundancy...
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
That's exactly what I had in mind... Add another 2 qmgrs to the mix as gateway qmgr (great for broker isolation). No need to have them HA clustered, a client channel table would do for failover. You can now load balance your brokers...
|
I guess as of MQ 6.0 you don't need the gateway QMs because you can round robin even if there is a local instance of the queue. Connect to either Broker QM via the channel table and let MQ 6 or 7 load balancing distribute the work to both brokers.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
The reason I was going for a gateway qmgr is to provide broker isolation.
No application has direct access to the broker qmgr. This allows you to suspend the qmgr and recycle broker and qmgr without impacting the environment other than throughput.
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
You also do client concentration on your gateway QM's, fjb_saper.
Peter_Potkay may not be doing any client connections at all.
These considerations play into one's views on using gateway qms to the broker. If apps are connected to their own QMs anyway, then they don't need gateway qms at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
