[rabbitmq-discuss] Is it possible that group clustering nodes shovel/federate with other group clustering nodes

[Jim Apperly]

Please also see this, for some disambiguation around how you might run
distributed rabbits:

http://www.rabbitmq.com/distributed.html

Jim

On 11 January 2012 16:09, Jerry Kuch <jerryk at vmware.com> wrote:

> Hi, Yican:
>
> There are very clear and friendly discussions of setting up clusters and
> shovel
> in this book, of which a preview eBook edition is currently available (the
> print
> book should hit the stands sometime around March):
>
> http://www.manning.com/videla/
>
> It does not, however, cover the Federation plugin.  For that you'll have
> to look
> at the Rabbit web site.
>
> The following links are from RabbitMQ's own web site:
>
> For clustering Rabbit:  http://www.rabbitmq.com/clustering.html
>
> For Federation:
> http://www.rabbitmq.com/blog/2011/06/22/federation-plugin-preview-release/
>
> And for Shovel:
> http://hg.rabbitmq.com/rabbitmq-shovel/file/default/README
>
> It might require a bit more thought about your specific application to
> clinch
> the decision between Federation and Shovel.
>
> Best regards,
> Jerry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yican Cao - 0661 - MITLL" <cao at ll.mit.edu>
> To: "Jerry Kuch" <jerryk at vmware.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 6:31:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [rabbitmq-discuss] Is it possible that group clustering nodes
> shovel/federate with other group clustering nodes
>
> Hi Jerry,
>
> Thanks for answer my email promptly.
> Yes, you're correct. That is exactly what I try to do.
>
> Is there any example or document I can follow?
> Thanks.
>
> Yican
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2012, at 8:20 PM, Jerry Kuch wrote:
>
> > Hi, Yican...
> >
> > If I understand your intentions correctly, you're proposing a use
> > case that's quite commonly done, namely the clustering of nodes within
> > a geographic location for increasing throughput, or perhaps HA, and
> > then setting up Federation or Shovel to span the long hauls between
> > your geographic locations.  This, plus judiciously picking which messages
> > you plan to move between sites is the essence of the sort of WAN
> > distribution you're after.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Jerry
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Yican Cao - 0661 - MITLL" <cao at ll.mit.edu>
> > To: rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:03:44 PM
> > Subject: [rabbitmq-discuss] Is it possible that group clustering nodes
> shovel/federate with other group clustering nodes
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a crazy idea:
> > 1. clustering 3 nodes with HAQ (highly available queue) as group A.
> > 2. clustering other 2 nodes with HAQ as group B.
> > 3. federating/shoveling group A and group B with 1 or 2 exchange.
> >
> > Group A and B will connect via WAN, so clustering is not recommended by
> RabbitMQ.
> >
> > Is it possible? If so, has anyone done this?
> > Thanks a lot.
> >
> >
> > Yican Cao
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20120111/937850e8/attachment.htm>