| Author |
Message
|
| Sam Uppu |
 Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:45 pm Post subject: Overlapping of clusters by using a PR |
 |
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 610
|
Hi Guys,
We are using MQ version 6 on Solaris.
We have a requirement as below:
QM1, QM2, QM3, QM4 are in one cluster called CLUS1.
QM1 & QM2 are FRs. (The Cluster sender/receiver channels are defined between QM1 & QM2).
QM3 & QM4 are PRs.(The cluster sender channels of QM3 & QM4 are pointing to QM1)
There is another cluster called CLUS2 with QM5 and QM6 FRs.(The cluster sender/receiver channels are defined between QM5 and QM6)
Now we need to use the overlapping of clusters for QM3 & QM4(PRs)...i.e., the QM3 & QM4 should be part of both the clusters CLUS1 and CLUS2.
Actions taken QM3(PR):
Defined the cluster sender channel on QM3 pointing to QM1 with CLUSNL attribute i.e., namelist(CLUSTERNAMELIST). CLUSTERNAMELIST with NAMES(CLUS1,CLUS2).
Defined the cluster receiver channel pointing to itself with CLUSNL(CLUSTERNAMELIST).
When I do a DISPLAY CLUSQMGR(*) QMTYPE on QM1(FR of CLUS1), I see QM1, QM2, QM3, QM4 which is good.
When I do DISPLAY CLUSQMGR(*) QMTYPE on QM5(FR of CLUS2), I dont see QM3 in QM5.
Question:
Is it possible for a partial repository tobe part of both clusters without defining the cluster sender channels explicitely to a FR of each cluster?(to QM1 and to QM5 which are FRs).
Thanks for your thoughts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| xhaxk |
| Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 30 Oct 2008
Posts: 31
|
| Quote: |
| Is it possible for a partial repository tobe part of both clusters without defining the cluster sender channels explicitely to a FR of each cluster?(to QM1 and to QM5 which are FRs). |
no. why would you think so?
how could QM5 know that QM3 is a member of CLUS2 unless it is told it is? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
YES and NO.
YES it is possible as you described it BUT QM1 would need to be FR for both clusters.
NO the way you configured it you will need 2 cluster sender channels, one to QM1 and one to QM5. You can however as you did use a single cluster receiver for both clusters. It could be advantageous however to define a separate cluster receiver for each cluster. You can then shut them down separately should the need arise.
Have fun 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AkankshA |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Singapore
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
YES it is possible as you described it BUT QM1 would need to be FR for both clusters.
|
saper, can u elaborate on this , please
_________________
Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| AkankshA wrote: |
| fjb_saper wrote: |
YES it is possible as you described it BUT QM1 would need to be FR for both clusters.
|
saper, can u elaborate on this , please |
If QM1 is a full repository (resnl(mylist)) for both clus1 and clus2 you can get away with using a cluster sender using the clusternl(mylist) attribute where mylist resolves to clus1, clus2.
As the QM1 qmgr is an FR for both clus1 and clus2 a single cluster sender channel may/can be defined. Keep in mind though that data message traffic really goes by way of the defined cluster receivers. This single cluster sender is just for full repository notification and lookup purposes (cluster control traffic).
Have fun
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AkankshA |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
Posts: 1494
Location: Singapore
|
opps... i presumed in operlapping cluster, common Qm should not be FR.. completely wrong assumption 
nyways, again i learn... 
thanks saper 
_________________
Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Sam Uppu |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 610
|
[quote="fjb_saper"]YES and NO.
YES it is possible as you described it BUT QM1 would need to be FR for both clusters.
Do we need again cluster sender/receiver channels between QM1 and QM5?.
NO the way you configured it you will need 2 cluster sender channels, one to QM1 and one to QM5. You can however as you did use a single cluster receiver for both clusters. It could be advantageous however to define a separate cluster receiver for each cluster. You can then shut them down separately should the need arise.
By defining the cluster sender channel from QM3 to QM1(CLUS1's FR) and QM5(CLUS2's FR)..we are able to make QM3 part of both the clusters.
Question:
Is there any harm if the PR has 2 cluster sender channels pointing to 2 different FRs(of different clusters)?.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| exerk |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
| Sam Uppu wrote: |
Question:
Is there any harm if the PR has 2 cluster sender channels pointing to 2 different FRs(of different clusters)?.
Thanks. |
No. This is the ideal - separation of channels, which is why fjb_saper suggested separate CLUSRCVR's too - and it's the only way that a queue manager is going to know it's in two different clusters.
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| Sam Uppu wrote: |
| Is there any harm if the PR has 2 cluster sender channels pointing to 2 different FRs(of different clusters)?. |
It's valid for a queue manager to be a PR in 2 different clusters. In such a situation it would need a cluster sender to a FR of each cluster.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Sam Uppu |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yatiri
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 610
|
[quote="Sam Uppu"][quote="fjb_saper"]YES and NO.
YES it is possible as you described it BUT QM1 would need to be FR for both clusters.
Not sure what saper is saying. Do we need again cluster sender/receiver channels between QM1 and QM5?. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| JosephGramig |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1244
Location: Gold Coast of Florida, USA
|
Sam Uppu,
There are a lot of possibilities. Take the excellent advice of keeping things simple and never use namelists with cluster channels. The PR(s) will need two cluster senders (one for each cluster) and two cluster receivers (one for each cluster). This makes it very clear to the observer what your intent is. You might even incorporate the cluster name and QMGR name as part of the channel name (remember, you only have 20 characters).
A PR that is in more then one cluster could be called a Gatway QMGR.
One last point, every FR in a cluster must have an explicit cluster sender to every other FR in a cluster to ensure that the repositories do not get out of sync. This is one of the reasons why at least two and no more then two FRs for a cluster is a best practice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| chris boehnke |
| Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 369
|
Good info Joseph.
You can use the cluster channel names like this:
On PR-QM3
For CLUS1:
ClusterSender1: TO.CLUS1.QM1
ClusterReceiver: TO.CLUS1.QM3
For CLUS2:
ClusterSender2: TO.CLUS2.QM5
ClusterReceiver2: TO.CLUS2.QM3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
