I'm trying to configure a clustered websphere application server that connects to a clustered MQ.
However, the the information I have is details for two instances of MQ with different host names, server channels and queue manager which belongs to the same MQ cluster name.
On the websphere console, I can see input fields for hostname, queue manager and server channel, I cannot find anything that I can specify multiple MQ details.
If I pick one of the MQ detail, will MQ clustering still work? If not, how will I enable MQ clustering given the details I have?
WebSphere MQ clustering affects the behavior of how queue managers talk amongst themselves. It does not change how an application connects or talks to a queue manager so the question as asked seems to be assuming some sort of clustering behavior that is not present in WMQ.
To set up the app server with two addresses, please see Configuring multi-instance queue manager connections with WebSphere MQ messaging provider custom properties in the WAS v7 Knowledge Center for instructions on how to configure a connection factory with a multi-instance CONNAME value.
If you specify a valid QMgr name in the Connection Factory and the QMgr to which the app connects doesn't have that specific name then the connection is rejected. Normally a multi-instance CONNAME is used to connect to a multi-instance QMgr. This is a single highly available queue manager that can be at one of two different IP addresses so using a real QMgr name works in that case. But if the QMgrs to which your app is connecting are two distinct and different-named queue managers, which is what you described, you should specify an asterisk (a * character) as the queue manager name in your connection factory as described here. This way the app will not check the name of the QMgr when it gets a connection.
If I pick one of the MQ detail, will MQ clustering still work? If not, how will I enable MQ clustering given the details I have?
Depends on what you mean by "clustering". If you believe that the app will see one logical queue which is hosted by two queue managers, then no. That's not how WMQ clustering works. Each queue manager hosting a clustered queue gets a subset of messages sent to that queue. Any apps getting from that queue will therefore only ever see the local subset.
But if by "clustering" you intend to connect alternately to one or the other of the two queue managers and transmit messages to a queue that is in the same cluster but not hosted on either of the two QMgrs to which you connect, then yes it will work fine. If your Connection Factory knows of only one of the two QMgrs you will only connect to that QMgr, and sending messages to the cluster will still work. But set it up as described in the links I've provided and your app will be able to connect to either of the two QMgrs and you can easily test that by stopping the channel on the one it connects to and watching it connect to the other one.
Good luck!
UPDATE:
To be clear the detail provide are similar to hostname01, qmgr01, queueA, serverchannel01. And the other is hostname02, qmgr02, queueA, serverchannel02.
WMQ Clients will connect to two different QMgrs using a multi-instance CONNAME only when...
* character) or a space for the QMgr name when the connection request is made (i.e. in the Connection Factory).It is possible to have WMQ connect to one of several different queue managers where the channel name differs on each by using a Client Connection Definition Table, also known as a CCDT. The CCDT is a compiled artifact that you create using MQSC commands to define CLNTCONN channels. It contains entries for each of the QMgrs the client is eligible to connect to. Each can have a different QMgr name, host, port and channel. However, when defining the CCDT the administrator defines all the entries such that the QMgr name is replaced with the application High Level Qualifier. For example, the Payroll app wants to connect to any 1 of 3 different QMgrs. The WMQ Admin defines a CCDT with three entries but uses PAY01, PAY02, and PAY03 for the QMgr names. Note this does not need to match the actual QMgr names. The application then specifies the QMgr name as PAY* which selects all three QMgrs in the CCDT.
Please see Using a client channel definition table with WebSphere MQ classes for JMS for more details on the CCDT.
Is MQ cluster not similar to application server clusters?
No, not at all.
Wherein two-child nodes are connected to a cluster. And an F5 URL will be used to distribute the load to each node. Does not WMQ come with a cluster url / f5 that we just send message to and the partitioning of messages are transparent?
No. The WMQ cluster provides a namespace within which applications and QMgrs can resolve non-local objects such as queues and topics. The only thing that ever connects to a WebSphere MQ cluster is a queue manager. Applications and human users always connect to specific queue managers. There may be a set of interchangeable queue managers such as with the CCDT, but each is independent.
With WAS the messaging engine may run on several nodes, but it provides a single logical queue from which applications can get messages. With WMQ each node hosting that queue gets a subset of the messages and any application consuming those messages sees only that subset.
HTTP is stateless and so an F5 URL works great. When it does maintain a session, that session exists mainly to optimize away connection overhead and tends to be short lived. WMQ client channels are stateful and coordinate both single-phase and two-phase units of work. If an application fails over to another QMgr during a UOW, it has no way to reconcile that UOW.
Because of the nature of WMQ connections, F5 is never used between QMgrs. It is only used between client and QMgr for connection balancing and not message traffic balancing. Furthermore, the absence or presence of an MQ cluster is entirely transparent to the application which, in either case, simply connects to a QMgr to get and./or put messages. Use of a Multi-Instance CONNAME or a CCDT file makes that connection more robust by providing multiple equivalent QMgrs to which the client can connect but that has nothing whatever to do with WMQ clustering.
Does that help?
Please see: