[rabbitmq-discuss] mirrored queue cluster

Fri Oct 4 15:44:44 BST 2013

One option which we've considered, but not yet implemented is load
balancing connections between a pool (in F5 parlance) of multiple clusters
with identical configurations.

The challenge in this case is ensuring as even of distribution as possible
both for consumers and producers so you don't end up with a backlog of
messages in one cluster or wasted capacity.

On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:38 AM, PATAR, SAGAR <sp345s at att.com> wrote:

> What approach do you guys suggest to have both fault tolerance and
> scalability as our load increases ..
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rabbitmq-discuss-bounces at lists.rabbitmq.com [mailto:
> rabbitmq-discuss-bounces at lists.rabbitmq.com] On Behalf Of Tim Watson
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 10:34 AM
> To: Discussions about RabbitMQ
> Cc: Discussions about RabbitMQ
> Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] mirrored queue cluster
>
> On 4 Oct 2013, at 15:25, "PATAR, SAGAR" <sp345s at att.com> wrote:
>
> > Adding more slaves to the cluster will increase the capacity the cluster
> handles.. Is the statement correct??
> >
>
> No, adding slaves creates redundancy but doesn't increase capacity. If
> anything, it will decrease capacity (in terms of being able to mod data
> through the cluster) due to the added overhead. Mirroring is a fault
> tolerance feature, not a load/capacity increasing one.
>
> Hth.
>
> Tim
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20131004/2b0c17af/attachment.htm>