activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Huffman <robert.huff...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Network of brokers and destination policies
Date Fri, 11 Aug 2017 18:10:31 GMT
I'm primarily concerned about running out of space in broker memory. And
we're not load-balancing between the applications; they are completely
different, but both consume from some of the same topics that the clients
publish to.

Application 1 can fall behind when processing some of those messages. With
flow control enabled, and no destination policies, then both brokers 1 and
3 could dedicate 100% of their memory to those topic, thus starving all the
other messages.

Anyway, you answered my question, I think: if we have destination policies
in broker 1 to prevent that problem, we need a similar destination policy
in broker 3.

Thanks again for the help.



On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Tim Bain <tbain@alumni.duke.edu> wrote:

> What resources are you concerned about? Are you trying to load-balance the
> work across the two applications (i.e. you're concerned about CPU and about
> pre-allocating messages to a particular application), or are you worried
> about running out of space in the brokers' message stores? Or something
> else?
>
> If you're concerned about filling the message stores (since you mentioned
> PFC), then yes you do need to configure policies on Broker 3 as well. But I
> didn't follow the final bit about percentages for Broker 1 and Broker 2.
>
> Tim
>
> On Aug 10, 2017 9:53 AM, "rth" <robert.huffman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Here's a simplified diagram of my broker network:
> >
> > <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/file/n4729601/Broker_Network.png>
> >
> > Application 1 and Application 2 both both use messaging internally. Their
> > messages do not need to be distributed across the broker network.
> >
> > The applications consume messages from the clients that all connect to
> > Broker 3. However, processing of those messages is relatively slow.
> > Therefore, Broker 1 and Broker 2 are configured with destination policies
> > for the external destinations so they do not consume 100% of the brokers'
> > resources, and we enable flow control so the clients will slow down
> > production of those messages.
> >
> > If I understand you correctly, we must also configure destination
> policies
> > for those external destinations on Broker 3. Otherwise, when Application
> 1
> > pushes back, Broker 3 would use 100% of its resources for that
> destination,
> > right?
> >
> > Furthermore, I cannot just copy the destination policies: I need to
> > determine what percentage of Broker 3's resources will be used by
> > Application 1 and Application 2 messages.
> >
> > Does that sound right?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.
> > nabble.com/Network-of-brokers-and-destination-policies-
> > tp4729188p4729601.html
> > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message