| Author |
Message
|
| sunny_30 |
 Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:04 pm Post subject: MQclient app reconnect via F5 |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 258
|
Im trying to understand the workings of a WAS QCF posting messages to F5 VIP that points to 2 QManagers. In case one of the QMs went down, would it be ConnPool that reconnects ? or Application that have to have logic to reconnect ? or does F5 handle the broken connection transparent to pool/App ?
Also, would things be any different if MQCONNX is used (instead of MQCONN) in the Application and/or DefRecon is configured server side (CCDT not F5) or in MQclient.ini (if its not WAS)
Thank you |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| PeterPotkay |
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poobah
Joined: 15 May 2001
Posts: 7722
|
The F5 doesn't know anything about MQ or how to reconnect an MQ application.
The application needs to drive the reconnection attempt, or in moderm versions of MQ Client, the MQ Client Libraries can do it for you if so configured.
_________________
Peter Potkay
Keep Calm and MQ On |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Leave the F5 out of the mix. For Multi-Instance qmgrs there is a custom property for the connection factory called (from memory) connectionnamelist or something like that (look it up). This will cover (with the MQ libraries) the case when the qmgr swiches to the stand by instance...
If you need to choose between multiple available (different) qmgrs use the channel table.
Have fun 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| sunny_30 |
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 03 Oct 2005
Posts: 258
|
Thanks both ! The 2 QMs arent MI type. I agree connList for MI is more of a failover than load-balancing which we are trying to achieve.
I have configured CCDT with connList, with LoadBalancing switched on. defRecon on clnt-chl is set to Yes: Not sure if this setting matters if the client is a WAS QCF (to post) messages. Simple put case. Im not refering to MDB pull or a ReqRep scenario.
Trying to understand if there would be any extra benefit if F5 used, esp from reconnect standpoint (transparent to app something like defrecon would do) if compared to CCDT is used. Looks like it wont make any difference at all as its clear from your answers that App has to drive the reconn attempt whether its F5 or CCDT.
However - would it make any difference to keep reconn transparent to app if this combination MQCONNX/CCDT/defrecon is feasible with WAS-QCF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Don't know which version of WAS => version of MQClient on WAS you have.
Since the MI version of queue managers you can set these properties on the QCF in JNDI and don't need a CCDT. However the connectionNameList would have to be an entry to be made in the additonal parms for the QCF and maybe as well for the re-connection policy. I can only advise you to read and search the manuals (both MQ and WAS) and redbooks for the correct JNDI setup in WAS.
Have fun
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
