activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Wilson <mike...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: Best broker setup for M x N scenario with one network hop
Date Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:10:12 GMT
To close my previous question, I'd like to say it 
seems to work well to let the backend servers connect 
to each of the frontend brokers like I planned:

  frontend1
    embedded broker
      queue1 (producer)
  frontend2
    embedded broker
      queue2 (producer)

  backend1
    connection to frontend1 broker
      queue1 (consumer)
    connection to frontend2 broker
      queue2 (consumer)
  backend2
    connection to frontend1 broker
      queue1 (consumer)
    connection to frontend2 broker
      queue2 (consumer)

Currently I'm specifying connections with explicit IP 
addresses but I might look into using discovery.

Best regards
Mike

Mike Wilson wrote:
> I'm looking for help in choosing a broker topology for
> our system with <M> frontend servers sending messages
> to <N> backend servers.
> 
> We want to minimize network bandwidth so want a 
> solution where a (successful) message is only 
> transferred in one copy over one network hop.
> 
> This means I'm looking at a solution with embedded 
> brokers. We're also considering using MessageGroups 
> so the network of brokers topology is probably not 
> possible.
> 
> I'm thinking that we could embed a broker in every
> frontend server, and let backend servers connect to
> all brokers. It's ok to lose all messages for a 
> frontend server if it goes down.
> 
> But what about having the backend servers being
> separately load-balanced over <M> different brokers;
> is that setup even possible and does it cause unwanted
> effects?
> 
> Thanks
> Mike


Mime
View raw message