[rabbitmq-discuss] Architecture Question: 2 Brokers, or Not 2 Brokers ?

[Simone Busoli]

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 23:57, dnsplus <developer at dnsplus.net> wrote:

>
> Thank you for all this. If I were inclined to use central and remote
> exchanges/brokers, then SHOVEL is the missing piece I have been looking
> for.
> However ... oh, the overhead with maintaining it all !
>

Yes, I mentioned federation but in this context shovel is pretty much the
same thing, although perhaps a little lighter than federation. Going down
the route of several brokers, indeed, I see it becoming a pain quite soon.


>
> I suppose I am inclined to go with a Central Broker and have remote
> consumers, and was wondering if someone might convince me otherwise.
> However, this has not yet happened.
>

Perhaps some guys of the dev team can shed some light given their greater
experience.


>
> Seeing as how my application is more of a "task distribution and management
> system" where all sites are processing the same tasks (with RabbitMQ making
> sure that the tasks are received), it has occurred to me that I might want
> a
> database component at the central data center as well. I am working on a
> conceptual workflow to flush this idea out.
>

I never used it personally, but if you're going to require a central store
anyway you may consider some messaging solutions that come with the storage
itself, after all according to what you describe you would be leveraging
just a very small part of what RabbitMQ provides. For instance MS SQL
Server ships with a built-in message broker, I don't know how it works but
it may be worth investigating, and I'm sure other storages provide that as
well. Some googling of "distributed work queues" may turn up something
interesting too.


>
> I keep coming back around to keeping as much intelligence as possible at
> Central, and keeping the consumer side as lean as I can.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Architecture-Question%3A-2-Brokers%2C-or-Not-2-Brokers---tp33189279p33191832.html
> Sent from the RabbitMQ mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120124/76c637d5/attachment.htm>