Hello, These are exactly the type of questions we had when I initiated the thread. I was actually wondering if there were any solution for the management of a distributed network of amqp components.
In case of lack of sources of inspiration we had an idea to store the "target" state in HA store and use it to: - update newly joining components. - re-attempt the failing operations on brokers that disagree We are also studying the impact of having inconsistencies between the state of components. The cardinality of possible scenarios is problematic. In some cases (mostly failures on brokers) the inconsistency is not harmful, the side effect being less performance and a higher troubleshooting effort. In some other cases (mostly failures on routers) it's less tolerable (broken network). I thought it was worth checking if someone went down this road before and would like to share some experience back. Thanks, Rawad On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Rob Godfrey <[email protected]> wrote: > While this does seem like an application concern... I think rolling back > probably makes sense. More generally how are you planning on dealing with > inconsistent state between brokers? What if one of the instances is > temporarily off-line when a new queue is created... or what if you want to > add a new broker to your cluster? Are you planning on building tooling to > bring brokers into line with the existing state? How are you determining > the "current" state if you have brokers that disagree? > > -- Rob > > On 4 February 2017 at 07:10, Rawad Assaf <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I have a use case where the dispatch router should be used with an array > of > > brokers to provide a scalable distributed work queue. > > > > The queue should be created at runtime using a management API that > creates > > the queue across all the brokers and advertise it at the level of the > > Dispatch router. > > > > My question concerns the transactionality of the above creation. What > > happens if the operation succeeds only on a subset of the brokers? Should > > we rollback the operation to ensure all the brokers remain in a > consistant > > state? > > > > There's a good chance this is an "application" concern but I was > wondering > > if I you have any recommendation for the above question. > > > > Best regards, > > Rawad > > > -- Rawad.
