| Author |
Message
|
| keenlearner |
 Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:12 am Post subject: Broker and QM |
 |
|
Acolyte
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 62
|
Hi
Can one explained me why do we need one individual Queue Manager per broker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Mr Butcher |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Padawan
Joined: 23 May 2005
Posts: 1716
|
because that is the way it was designed
_________________
Regards, Butcher |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:19 am Post subject: Re: Broker and QM |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| keenlearner wrote: |
| Can one explained me why do we need one individual Queue Manager per broker. |
Short answer - that's how the software's built.
Slightly longer answer - because the broker uses a particular set of queues defined to the queue manager, and running two or more brokers would require either a) some means of individually naming the queues or b) the two brokers being able to identify "their" messages.
Better question - why would you want more than one broker on a queue manager? It would cause a number of issues with coding and scaling that occur to me sitting here, never mind the increased problems of administration!
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
| It is an annoying constraint and one that could have easily been avoided with a queue name prefix. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
[quote="zpat"]It is an annoying constraint and one that could have easily been avoided with a queue name prefix.[/quote]
You could always make a format suggestion to IBM on the matter.
Personally, I don't find this an onerous restriction.
For example:-
Being able to configure the various QMGRs with the resources, objects and exits etc that it needs and being able to stop/start it independantly of other brokers improves the manageability & resillience of the overall subsystem.
AFAIK, there is no financial penalty in terms of licensing costs from IBM for using multiple QMGR's & Brokers on one system beyond the costs for a single broker and QMGR on the same system.
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| zpat |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 19 May 2001
Posts: 5866
Location: UK
|
It's particularly annoying on development platforms when you don't need the (theoretical) resilience.
Even more true for configuration managers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
| zpat wrote: |
It's particularly annoying on development platforms when you don't need the (theoretical) resilience.
|
We opted for multiple execution groups on one DEV QM/Broker versus multiple Broker/QMs. We use suffixes for the queue names, and UDPs in the bar files to be able deploy the same code to each EG. The q names determine which environment is used. Datasource names are set at bar file time. Code in the ESQL queries what EG the flow is running in to determine q names to use when building Destination Lists.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| keenlearner |
| Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Acolyte
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 62
|
| Agreed to to all of the above discussion. but there must something concrete which let to this decision. May be the administration, independent functioning of the each broker may be the some of the reasons and they are listed above also. But yet to find out the root reason which let to this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| keenlearner wrote: |
| But yet to find out the root reason which let to this. |
Only the dev team at IBM know the truth. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
