Routing and caching layer vs. F5 load balancer or both.

We have 4 WFE servers farm, For load balancing, I can see following option.
Purchase the F5 load balancer, don't use the RM.
Have a one more server that will do Routing using RM and caching. Don't use the
F5 load balancer.
Have both F5 load balancer and RM
I am wondering what approach we should take. I have read a lot of articles in MSDN, all suggests that we should have a routing & caching layer at front of WFE server. Considering we have just 4 WFE Servers do we need to have a separate routing and cache
layer along with F5 load balancer. I am really confused here.
Regards Restless Spirit

Using Request Management isn't a replacement for using a hardware load balancer. It will be used internally within SharePoint to route things appropriately. It depends on the number of users your farm will support, but you may or may not need
a dedicated distributed cache / request management layer. Refer to this
diagram to see where your farm fits in.
Corey Roth - SharePoint Server MVP blog:
www.dotnetmafia.com twitter: @coreyroth |
SP2 Apps

Similar Messages

What's the difference between transport route and transport layer

what's the difference between transport route and transport layer,Can somebody give me some explaination? thks in advance!

Hi,
Transport Layer in ABAP Workbench
    The Change and Transport System supports the distribution of development
    work on large projects across multiple SAP Systems.
    The packages in each development system are grouped into one transport
    layer.
    The transport layer determines whether objects are assigned to a local
    or transportable change request.
Use
    Each of your SAP development systems is assigned a transport layer as
    its standard transport layer. If you use Extended Transport Control, you
    can assign different standard transport layers to certain clients.
    You can define at the most one consolidation target for each SAP System
and transport layer.
When you create a package, it is assigned the standard transport layer
of the SAP System.
If you want to assign a different transport layer to a package, you
require the administration authorization for the Change and Transport
System.
The objects in a package automatically have the transport attributes
defined for the corresponding transport layer.
o   If a consolidation route originating in their SAP System is defined,
     then the objects are assigned to a transportable request, and
     transported into the consolidation target when it is released.
o   If a consolidation route is not defined, the objects are assigned to
     a local request, and are not transported.
Customizing settings are not assigned to a package. They have the
transport attributes of the standard transport layer of the system or
client.
It is best to assign a package a standard transport layer for which a
consolidation route originating in the development system is defined.
To display and maintain the transport layers and routes, use the
Transport Management System (transaction STMS).
Only the system adminstrator can make changes.
Caution:
     The tables TSYST, DEVL, TWSYS, TASYS are no longer productive as of
     Release 4.0A and cannot be maintained.
Regards
Ben

Diff. between transport route and transport layer

hi gurus,
What is the Diff. between transport route and transport layer.
Regds:
BBR.

No interview questions
Read the "Rules of Engagement"
regards
Juan

Help! Azure Cloud Services and Virtual Machine Web Servers Load Balancing

I have a cloud service. I have two virtual machines setup as web servers each with IIS installed. I have configured my domain registrar to point my domain name to the cloud service IP address. I also went into the endpoints of each virtual machine and verified
that I have http port 80 setup on both in a load balanced set.
I am unable to access websites on either server at this point. DNS propogation site shows "error: token mismatch"...this has been setup since yesterday and still error.
Can anyone assist me in where I went wrong? Am I confused to how the cloud service should work? I am assuming it will allow me to load balance the two virtual machines in the way I have configured above. Please help!!!!

Hi,
Thank you for posting in here.
We are checking on this issue and will get back at earliest.
Regards,
Manu Rekhar

CSS load balancing in both directions.

Hi all,
my questions are
-if it is possible divide (virtualize) one physical CSS to separate ones?
and than
-if it is possible use one virtual CSS for loadbalancing in one direction and other CSS use for loadbalancing in opposite direction?
BR
gg

It sounds like you need to implement a group rule using 'add service service_name'.
ie.
service web1
ip address 192.168.1.1
port 80
active
service web2
ip address 192.168.1.2
port 80
active
owner vip
content web_servers
vip address 192.168.1.100
port 80
protocol tcp
add service web1
add service web2
active
group web_servers
vip address 192.168.1.100
add service web1
add service web2
active
What this should do is NAT any request *initiated* from web1 or web2 to the IP address specified in the group rule. In this case it is 192.168.1.100, the same as the content rule. This is fine, or you can use a different IP. I'm using RFC1918 addresses in this example, as 192.168.1.100 would be natted to some public IP on the firewall in front of the CSS.
If you wanted to do internal load balancing, or load balance to a service *NOT* within your environment (ie. 3rd party data center), you would simply change 'add service' to 'add destination service' in the group rule.
James

I have a s-l-o-w MacBook. I cleared the cookies and cache. I tried loading Norton

I tried loading Norton Internet Security because I thought I had a virus. Any ideas to speed things up?

Never ever ever download Not on AntiVirus it will do more ham than any good. Remember you are running a Mac not a PC and you don't have to worry about Viruses.
Anything you would or could download would be a Malware, and would thus cause more issues rather than fix anything.
This is from John Galt and should be followed to a tee.
Back up your Mac, if you have not already done so. To learn how to do that read Mac Basics: Time Machine backs up your Mac.
Then, consider running EtreCheck and posting its report. Read about it here. It contains a link to download EtreCheck. Do not download it from anywhere else (such as may be found by following the results of an Internet search).
DON

NFS and ISCSI using ip hash load balance policy

As i know all these days that the best practice for iscsi is to use single nic and one standby with " route based port id" ButI have seen in a client placethat NFS and iscsi are configured to use"route based ip hash" and multiple nic and it has been working all these days. i can not see that iscsi does multi path there.I was told by the sys admin that it is ok to use that since the both protocol are configured in same storage and it does not make sense to separate it ,his explanation that if we want separate policy then use separate storage that is one for nfs and other for iscsi, i do not buy that, i might be wrong.He pointed his link below saying that you can use ip hash.http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalI....Is it ok to use " route based ip hash for iscsi as on the link?
This topic first appeared in the Spiceworks Community

When you create your uplink port profile you simply use the auto channel command in your config:
channel-group auto mode on
This will create a static etherchannel when two or more ports are added to the uplink port profile from the same host. Assuming your upstream switch config is still set to "mode on" for the etherchannel config, there's nothing to change.
Regards,
Robert

Load Balancing on 837 router

HI Prof,
I've two cisco 837 router with cisco IOS 12.3 currently. I would like to configure load balancing on both the router, have tried to configure GLBP but it show me that the hardware not supported.
Is there any other protocol or technology to achieve my desire?
Thank and Advice.

What are your requirements. Do you have multiple segments to support? Are you only looking for load-balancing or do you have a high availibility requirement?
In that case you can use multiple HSRP groups for instance.
Do both 837 routers have a separate xDSL connection?
Are you using NAT to translate between private and public address pools?
There is more than one solution to achieve load-balancing. Please answer the above questions and if possible draw a simple diagram of your desired topology.
HTH
Leon

Load balancing and High Availability topology

Our Forms 6i client-server application currently runs on Citrix farm of 20 Windows 2000 boxes (IBM Blade Servers 2 CPU and 2 Gig Memory).
Application supports 2000 users.
We are moving to AS 10g r2, forms 10g and the goal is to use same hardware, 20 Windows boxes (or less), for intranet web deployment.
What will be our best choices for application Load balancing and High Availability?
Hardware load balancer, Web Cache, mod-oc4j? Combinations?
Any suggestions, best practices, your experience?

Gerd, I understand, that you are running 10g web forms through the browser, but using Citrix for deployment. This means that in addition to Application Server and Forms runtime sessions, it will be separate browser session opened for each user. What the advantage of this configuration?
Michael, we are aware, that Citrix is not supported by Oracle as a deployment platform. That only means that prior contacting Oracle Support we have to reproduce the problem in standard environment. It was never been a problem to reproduce problem :) We were using Citrix as a deployment platform for Forms 6i client/server for 4 years, but now we are forced to upgrade to 10g.
We are familiar with various Load balancing options available. The question is which option is the most "workable" in our case.

Using Web Cache to Load balance Forms Server application.

Hello,
I apologize for cross posting this question in the Forms and Caching Services forum. But I thought my question will have a better chance.
I have read that it's possible to use Oracle Web Cache as a software load balancer between multiple Application Servers.
We are running Oracle9iAS R1.0.2.2.2a, with Forms/Reports6i servers on 2 Win2k boxes i.e our Forms6i application is deployed on two seperate boxes in two distinct locations. Users at each location, use their respective App Server url.
Since the application is the same i.e. Forms6i code/fmx is the same for both locations, I am looking into loadbalancing and failover capability that Web Cache might be able to provide.
I AM ONLY LOOKING AT THE LOADBALANCING & FAILOVER capabilities and NOT caching.
So basically all users from both locations will point their browser to this Web Cache and the Web Cache will direct each connection to either of the two boxes. So, if either of the boxes dies, Web Cache will divert the requests to the other box.
My concern is whether Web Cache supports this for the Forms requests that it will receive from the users. We are using Servlet Deployment of Forms, so technically, all communication is going though the HTTPD.
Has anyone done this or has any ideas as to whether it's going to work or not? Oracle's FAQ insists that Forms is not supported. But I want to make sure that even loadbalancing is not supported. And if not supported then is there any other solution.
Any comments appreciated.
Thanks,
Manish

Using Web Cache to load balance servlet-based Forms (6i and 9i) is unofficially supported. I say "unofficially" because we have actual customers doing it and getting support, but the 2 development teams (Forms and Web Cache) haven't actually done any integration testing of this sort of configuration yet. For your case, please contact your Support rep and ask what was done to use Web Cache as a load balancer for Forms6i at METRO in Germany. The Forms product managemment team is writing up a white paper to describe how to do it, but until then, you'll need to go through Support. Please contact me if you want more information.

UAG External Load Balancing and ISATAP

Hi Experts,
I am deploying a UAG Array to be used for Direct Access. The Array will consist of two servers and use an F5 External Load Balancer. In addition and in similarity
to 90% of the other corporate intranets out there, the internal network is IPv4 with no IPv6 transition technologies deployed. The article
http://blogs.technet.com/b/edgeaccessblog/archive/2010/05/17/configuring-an-external-load-balanced-uag-directaccess-array-for-an-ipv4-only-network.aspx
isgreat but to my mind has no information to support ‘Manage Out’ and throws up a number of questions: (Note that I want to enable ‘Manage Out’ capability and as far as I am aware that is achieved by using ISATAP)
The article describes that you have to generate and configure your own IPv6 address for the internal interface when using an external load balancer. Does anyone know why? Why not let UAG assign
the addresses as per the default?
UAG by default configures itself as an ISATAP router when there is no IPv6 infrastructure deployed on the internal network
to facilitate ‘manage out’. This still applies when using Windows NLB. Why does this no longer apply when using an external load balancer? I.e. Why does UAG no longer configure itself as a ISATAP router?
In relation to question 2; you therefore need to move your ISATAP router to a different device (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee690463.aspx),
in doing so how do you configure the ISATAP environment to traverse the UAG servers without some sort of load balancing on the internal interfaces? I’m assuming that you can only tell the ISATAP router to use the one default gateway i.e. either one UAG server
or the other. This means that you would have all your outbound internally initiated traffic going via one server only – not very good for performance or fault tolerance.
In relation to question 3; I thought therefore that NLB could be used on the internal interface to solve the above problem, except that I have read that you can’t mix and match external load
balancing and NLB even though they are on separate networks due to bidirectional affinity. What does this actually mean and why does this not occur when load balancing is mixed in this manor?
Therefore when you wish to use external load balancers, do you:
A) Except the fact that you can’t use UAG as a ISATAP router and you do indeed need two devices
and deploy it as described here (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee690463.aspx)
or
B) Except the fact that that you can’t use UAG as a ISATAP router and any internal outbound
traffic travels via the one UAG server only.
Apologies for the long post, but I wanted to make sure that I get my thoughts down concisely so that it may help others who come up with the same questions
J
Thanks for your time everyone
Gary

I am also facing the same issue. I have UAG1 and UAG2, which are in an array, and externally load balanced. I've configured an external ISATAP router according to:
http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Configuring-ISATAP-Router-Windows-Server-2008-R2-Part2.html. However, as mentioned by others, the ISATAP router has to have either UAG1 or UAG2 as the next hop for IP-HTTPS traffic. As
a result, communication between the DirectAccess client and management devices will only work if the client is tunneling through the same UAG server that the ISATAP router has as the next hop for the IP-HTTPS prefix. From what I can tell, my configuration
is supported, but I can't figure out how to have the ISATAP router determine which UAG server a client is tunneling through. I thought about having two separate IP-HTTPS prefixes for each UAG server, but this would get overwritten when activating
the DirectAccess configuration. Maybe some type of internal load balancing?

Load Balancing, Tomcat, and SharePoint

I'm a new BusinessObjects customer and am working on getting all of the hardware in place for a new install. The initial plan is to have two BOE servers, and two tomcat virtual servers, with a hardware based load balancer (F5 BIG-IP Switch: Local Traffic Manager 1600 4GB, possibly) in front of the tomcat servers to handle the load balancing.
But, I'm starting to think that it would be a good idea for us to integrate directly in to our SharePoint portal using the SAP SharePoint Integration option.
So, here's my question. If we do that, then our users will get to their BusinessObjects information via SharePoint. So, SharePoint and IIS will be the web server. Will we still have a need for the Tomcat servers? Will SharePoint point to the load balancer, then to Tomcat, and finally to the BOE server, or will it go right to the BOE server, thus negating the need for the tomcat servers altogether, and also even negating the need for the load balancer? If so, can the BOE app servers themselves still be load balanced?
Hopefully this all makes sense - like I said, we're a new customer, so I don't fully understand all of what the servers are doing. I've spent several days searching the forums & the web & reading documentation and haven't come up with an answer yet, so I'm reaching out to you all & hoping somebody can clear it up for me. Thanks!!

Thank you for your input, Denis, this does help explain things. Also, thanks for pointing me to that Windows Patterns document. I hadn't seen that one - since we're starting out on 4.0, I've only been looking at documents under the 4.0 folders...
It sounds like we may want to utilize this same load balancer to balance the SharePoint traffic as well, while we're at it. Right now our SharePoint server is clustered using Microsoft Clustering, but not load balanced in any way. Or maybe we just post a link from within SharePoint to the regular old BI LaunchPad and call it a day!
So, if I understand correctly, if we utilize SharePoint, any traffic/processing that the Tomcat server would have handled would now be handled by the SharePoint server, which could potentially be significant. The actual processing of the reports, though, will still get handled by the BOE Cluster, which takes care of its own load balancing, so we'll be fine. Really the only thing the hardware load balancer does is allow the presentation layer to be load balanced - the layers beyond that get load balanced automatically via CMS. Is that all somewhat valid? In the patterns doc, there's Application Servers separate from the BOE Servers. We were just going to have two BOE servers and two Web servers. Where do the application servers fall in, and are they load balanced using the hardware piece?
If we were just concerned about High Availability, it seems like maybe we could more easily use Windows Clustering on those Tomcat servers, and avoid the hardware component altogether. Do the Web servers really get hammered that hard that we need them load balanced? It seems like the BOE servers are the ones doing the heavy resource intensive tasks and we get them load balanced without the hardware anyway, so maybe load balancing the web servers is overkill..... I'm sure a lot of this is tough to answer, I'm just trying to get a feel for it. I want us to have our best performance & be somewhat future-proofed, but don't want to buy things that I don't need to! We're probably looking at a small, 10-20 concurrent user setup for starters, and out to say 200 concurrent max once it's fully rolled out...
Thanks again!!

VO's and load balancing question

Hi guys,
As anyone got any experience in load balancing a web application using ADF BC's (EO's and VO's) and any problems that I face?
I am researching possible problems that will pop up while deploying my application. I want to have my app running on two servers and put some form of load balancer (hardware or software) in front of them. One issue I can think of is that when someone commits something on one server the VO cache on the other server will not get updated. This is a problem if there is a user on each server and they are both accessing the same row.
Regards
Barry
JDev: 10.1.3.2
JHS: 10.1.2.26

Hi,
this is what you want to read :
http://download-uk.oracle.com/docs/html/B25947_01/bcstatemgmt.htm#sm0318
You can handle state across instance of an AM within BC using a database
Frank

Need help with load balancing and DNS proxy

Hi,
I need help on how to configure my router so it will work with my DNS proxy and load balancing.
I have a Linksys LRT224 router. I have two broadband connections from two separate ISPs,500Mbps each (WAN1 & WAN2). WAN1 has a static IP and WAN2 is dynamic assigned. I use Unlocator (www.unlocator.com) so I can access geographically restricted sites (Pandora, Netflix, etc.).
The problem I have is that unlocator registers only one IP address (WAN1 address) and since I am doing load balancing I have no way of knowing if the DNS request will go through the registered IP (WAN1) or through the other (WAN2). I am not an expert in routing or networking but I'm guessing I have a way of configuring the router so all the DNS requests go out through WAN1, right?
In the router's Dual WAN config page there is a section for Protocol Binding. I tried to configure but only managed to screw up the internet at home. I used:
DNS[UDP/53-53]->192.168.1.1-192.168.1.254(0.0.0.0-0.0.0.0)WAN2
Any help or suggestions are appreciated.
Alex

Good solution though. That's probably the only way you could do true Load Balancing anyway.
Please remember to Kudo those that help you.
Linksys
Communities Technical Support

Need help with load balancing and DNS proxy -Repost

Hi,
I need help on how to configure my router so it will work with my DNS proxy and load balancing.
I have a Linksys LRT224 router. I have two broadband connections from two separate ISPs,500Mbps each (WAN1 & WAN2). WAN1 has a static IP and WAN2 is dynamic assigned. I use Unlocator (www.unlocator.com) so I can access geographically restricted sites (Pandora, Netflix, etc.).
The problem I have is that unlocator registers only one IP address (WAN1 address) and since I am doing load balancing I have no way of knowing if the DNS request will go through the registered IP (WAN1) or through the other (WAN2). I am not an expert in routing or networking but I'm guessing I have a way of configuring the router so all the DNS requests go out through WAN1, right?
In the router's Dual WAN config page there is a section for Protocol Binding. I tried to configure but only managed to screw up the internet at home. I used:
DNS[UDP/53-53]->192.168.1.1-192.168.1.254(0.0.0.0-0.0.0.0)WAN2
Any help or suggestions are appreciated.
Alex

Good solution though. That's probably the only way you could do true Load Balancing anyway.
Please remember to Kudo those that help you.
Linksys
Communities Technical Support

Routing and caching layer vs. F5 load balancer or both.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for