So things may have changed with the implementation but the last time I worked with Rabbit clustered nodes simply brokered requests to the master node. So depending on which node you connected, that connection brokered a request to the node where the queue existed. The notion of replication with full transactionality did not exist since 1) there weren't replicas of data on at least 2 nodes and 2) since there were not replicas, transactionality did not have to span multiple boxes. If this has been corrected, and please forgive me since my testing and review of all the code was circa 2009. It probably means that the throughput of Rabbit has probably diminished a great deal. Is this not the case anymore?

From: Gavin M. Roy [mailto:gmr at myyearbook.com]
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 1:54 PM
To: Jorge Varona
Cc: rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] Alice in Wonderland chasing the RabbitMq - Email found in subject

Serious problems with replication? What are you replicating? Other than HA, I'm having a hard time envisioning a desire to replicate queues since there are multiple routing models to publish data across multiple nodes without extra effort on your part.

I've scaled Rabbit to a fairly high velocity without any scaling issues. Not sure what the gripe is here.

Regards,

Gavin
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Jorge Varona <jvarona at directpartners.comwrote:
I have to ask, why go with RabbitMQ. There were some serious problems with replication last time I checked, which could make it hard to scale.

_______________________________________________
rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com<mailto:rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com>
https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20110715/3d57e4f7/attachment.htm>

Search Discussions

  • Alvaro Videla at Jul 16, 2011 at 5:32 am
    Hi Jorge,

    What you describe was RabbitMQ expected behavior while on cluster mode, so there's nothing to "correct". Such behavior hasn't changed AFAIK.

    Also AFAIK the RabbitMQ team is working on "Mirrored Queues", there's a thread on this ML explaining what they do and how they will work.

    Cheers,

    Alvaro
    On Jul 16, 2011, at 1:14 AM, Jorge Varona wrote:

    So things may have changed with the implementation but the last time I worked with Rabbit clustered nodes simply brokered requests to the master node. So depending on which node you connected, that connection brokered a request to the node where the queue existed. The notion of replication with full transactionality did not exist since 1) there weren?t replicas of data on at least 2 nodes and 2) since there were not replicas, transactionality did not have to span multiple boxes. If this has been corrected, and please forgive me since my testing and review of all the code was circa 2009. It probably means that the throughput of Rabbit has probably diminished a great deal. Is this not the case anymore?

    From: Gavin M. Roy [mailto:gmr at myyearbook.com]
    Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 1:54 PM
    To: Jorge Varona
    Cc: rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
    Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] Alice in Wonderland chasing the RabbitMq - Email found in subject

    Serious problems with replication? What are you replicating? Other than HA, I'm having a hard time envisioning a desire to replicate queues since there are multiple routing models to publish data across multiple nodes without extra effort on your part.

    I've scaled Rabbit to a fairly high velocity without any scaling issues. Not sure what the gripe is here.

    Regards,

    Gavin

    On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Jorge Varona wrote:
    I have to ask, why go with RabbitMQ. There were some serious problems with replication last time I checked, which could make it hard to scale.

    _______________________________________________
    rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
    rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
    https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss


    _______________________________________________
    rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
    rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
    https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss
    Sent form my Nokia 1100



    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20110716/3f9a60b1/attachment.htm>

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouprabbitmq-discuss @
categoriesrabbitmq
postedJul 15, '11 at 11:14p
activeJul 16, '11 at 5:32a
posts2
users2
websiterabbitmq.com
irc#rabbitmq

2 users in discussion

Jorge Varona: 1 post Alvaro Videla: 1 post

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2017 Grokbase