In a store and forward network of master/slave clusters, all the brokers receive messages? That would be nice, as that way we can have all the parsers from all the machines working and busy. That's why I was looking for Active/Active mode.
James.Strachan wrote: > > You can create a store and forward network of master/slave clusters if > you really need to - though I doubt you'll ever need to - but at least > you can tell your customer that yes, if you need to, you can run > multiple master/slave clusters in a store/forward network. > > On 20/11/2007, ktecho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I haven't done any performance test by now (besides testing some >> sending/receiving stuff in my notebook), but you sure can understand that >> I >> must provide a Scalability Guide to my customer, so even if I can process >> "one hundred million messages a second", I need to provide him with a >> guide >> just in case he need "two hundred million messages a second". That's why >> I >> need to fully understand how this works in ActiveMQ, but I found the docs >> to >> be a bit messy. Could be that english is not my native tongue, too. >> >> The machines that runs the brokers should do some more work (some parsing >> and inserting into file or BBDD), so it would be nice if we can use all >> of >> them (even if "all" is 2 or 3) as Masters, as using Slaves means >> something >> like calling the solution Active/Pasive, instead of Active/Active. >> >> Could I use two or three (just in case I need them) different Active >> (master) brokers using journaled files or database, and telling them that >> if >> one of them fails, the others takes its messages and routes them to >> consumers? Or that can only be done with Master/Slave (Active/Passive) >> configurations? >> >> Thanks a lot. >> >> >> >> James.Strachan wrote: >> > >> > On 19/11/2007, ktecho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Something like 860 KB/sec of text encapsulated into JMS messages of >> about >> >> 150 >> >> bytes each one, coming from 42 machines. The problem is that we need >> to >> >> do >> >> some parsing of the messages on the machine, and that the number of >> >> clients >> >> could potentially grow. That's why we need some brokers to be Master. >> > >> > So here's the common misconception. You can have thousands and >> > thousands of JMS clients processing messages concurrently on queues. >> > However a single message broker (or master/slave cluster) can deal >> > with this kind of volume without breaking into a sweat. >> > >> > Have you tried doing some performance benchmarking yet? >> > >> http://activemq.apache.org/activemq-performance-module-users-manual.html >> > >> > >> >> The only way to provide HA and Load Balancing is to increase the >> number >> >> of >> >> server in pairs (master/slave)? >> > >> > See this for more background >> > http://activemq.apache.org/clustering.html >> > >> > -- >> > James >> > ------- >> > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ >> > >> > Open Source Integration >> > http://open.iona.com >> > >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/High-Availability-and-Load-Balancing-tf4838228s2354.html#a13848519 >> Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > > -- > James > ------- > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ > > Open Source Integration > http://open.iona.com > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/High-Availability-and-Load-Balancing-tf4838228s2354.html#a13860437 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
