[rabbitmq-discuss] Unexaplainable behaviour with shovel plugin.
michael.laing at nytimes.com
Fri Feb 28 12:45:42 GMT 2014
Our 'wholesale' core topology is like a pancake, with many clusters spread
out into regions of the world, currently 3.
The pancake has 3 communication layers: 'input' for swapping inputs for
replicated processing, 'output' for distributing processing results, and
the 'postoffice' for general communication.
I experimented a lot with federation a year ago and had a few working
iterations but found it difficult to create a reliable, maintainable
configuration for our use case - federation tries to do so much for you.
So I turned to shovels for more simplicity and control at the expense of
more difficult configuration.
Some of our core clusters support the 'retail' layer of instances that
gateway to clients (candles?). We are introducing federation into one of
these communication links because we want the propagation of client
bindings from the gateway instance to the core - an excellent feature of
federation and an important refinement for us.
Initially I had thought that the 'new' federation replaced the 'old'
shovel, but this is not true - each tool has its place although their
With easier configuration in 3.3, the lowly shovel may get its due!
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Ben Hood <0x6e6562 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Laing, Michael
> <michael.laing at nytimes.com> wrote:
> > Ah yes - I must have carried that thought over when we switched from
> > federation to shovels :)
> What was it about federation that brought you to switch from
> federation to shovels?
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss