Sticky Load balancing
Does WLS 5.1 supports Sticky Load Balancing?
Thank you.
Rob.
http://www.weblogic.com/docs51/classdocs/javadocs/weblogic/rmi/extensions/CallRouter.html
- Prasad
Rob wrote:
> Looking at the online docs from BEA I found something that I think is what I
> need. it is called Parameter-based routing
>
> It seems that WebLogic Clusters supports several algorithms to address this
> kind of Load balancing. (something like sticky load balancing)
>
> The next text is from the online BEA's docs:
>
> Parameter-based routing
>
> It is also possible to gain finer grain control over load-balancing. Any
> clustered object can be assigned a CallRouter. This is a plug-in that is
> called before each invocation with the parameters of the call. The
> CallRouter is free to examine the parameters and return the name server to
> which the call should be routed.
>
> If this is correct (that this type of load balancing is slightly the same as
> sticky load balancing) then the questions is now:
>
> What is exactly a CallRouter and where can I see an example of this or more
> documentation.
>
> Rob wrote in message <[email protected]>...
> >Does WLS 5.1 supports Sticky Load Balancing?
> >
> >Thank you.
> >
> >Rob.
> >
> >
Cheers
- Prasad
Similar Messages
-
Can't get sticky load balancing to work
I'm really puzzled why sticky LB is not working for a simple case I'm trying. I have two simple JSP's, both registered (see web.xml and ias-web.xml below). I'm using lite session and set distributable to false. Just in case someone can tell by just looking at my session id if it's supposed to be sticky or not, it looks like following -
GXLiteSessionID-4818869464307751325
My two JSP's are also attached below, and they're pretty simple. A new session is supposed to be created in login page and clicking on the logout page invalidates the session.
What I see is that each request (whether login or logout) is randomly sent to any server. For example, if I go to login once, further request to login or logout (whether through refresh or by clicking on the link) is not necessarily sent to the same server.
Any idea what's missing in my setup? I've tried different types of load balancing (round robin, etc.) so I know that's not it.
Thanks a lot in advance.
Jitu
-----web.xml-------
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE web-app PUBLIC '-//Sun Microsystems, Inc.//DTD Web Application 2.2//EN' 'http://java.sun.com/j2ee/dtds/web-app_2_2.dtd'>
<web-app>
<display-name>WebDesk</display-name>
<distributable>false</distributable>
<servlet>
<servlet-name>TestLogin.jsp</servlet-name>
<jsp-file>TestLogin.jsp</jsp-file>
</servlet>
<servlet-mapping>
<servlet-name>TestLogin.jsp</servlet-name>
<url-pattern>TestLogin.jsp</url-pattern>
</servlet-mapping>
<servlet>
<servlet-name>TestLogout.jsp</servlet-name>
<jsp-file>TestLogout.jsp</jsp-file>
</servlet>
<servlet-mapping>
<servlet-name>TestLogout.jsp</servlet-name>
<url-pattern>TestLogout.jsp</url-pattern>
</servlet-mapping>
<login-config>
<auth-method>BASIC</auth-method>
<realm-name></realm-name>
<form-login-config>
<form-login-page></form-login-page>
<form-error-page></form-error-page>
</form-login-config>
</login-config>
</web-app>
-----ias-web.xml------
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ias-web-app PUBLIC '-//Sun Microsystems, Inc.//DTD iAS Web Application 1.0//EN' 'http://developer.iplanet.com/appserver/dtds/IASWebApp_1_0.dtd'>
<ias-web-app>
<servlet>
<servlet-name>TestLogin.jsp</servlet-name>
<guid>{A6D6B277-288D-1C22-C3CA-0800209A2F7C}</guid>
<servlet-info>
<sticky>true</sticky>
<sticky-lb>true</sticky-lb>
</servlet-info>
</servlet>
<servlet>
<servlet-name>TestLogout.jsp</servlet-name>
<guid>{B88B7D19-28B9-1C22-EE63-0800209A2F7C}</guid>
<servlet-info>
<sticky>true</sticky>
<sticky-lb>true</sticky-lb>
</servlet-info>
</servlet>
<session-info>
<impl>lite</impl>
<timeout-type>last-access</timeout-type>
<timeout>60</timeout>
<secure>false</secure>
<domain></domain>
<path>/</path>
<scope></scope>
</session-info>
</ias-web-app>
-----TestLogin.jsp-------
<%
java.util.Date date = new java.util.Date();
HttpSession sess = request.getSession(true);
System.out.println(date + ":TestLogin.jsp: sessionid = " + sess.getId() + ", new = " + sess.isNew());
%>
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>TestLogin</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginwidth=0 marginheight=0>
<p>
You are now logged in.<br>
<br>
TestLogin.jsp: sessionid = <%=sess.getId()%>, new = <%=sess.isNew()%><br>
<br>
Click here to logout.
</BODY>
</HTML>
----TestLogout.jsp-------
<%
java.util.Date date = new java.util.Date();
HttpSession sess = request.getSession(true);
System.out.println(date + ":TestLogout.jsp: sessionid = " + sess.getId() + ", new = " + sess.isNew());
%>
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>TestLogout</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginwidth=0 marginheight=0>
<p>
TestLogout.jsp: sessionid = <%=sess.getId()%>, new = <%=sess.isNew()%><br>
<br>
<%
sess.invalidate();
%>
You are now logged out.<br>
<br>
Click here to login.
</BODY>
</HTML>Hi,
I think it's best to wait for sometime and check the behaviour of sticky load balancing for sometime, the reason being one or more of the following...
- Although sticky feature ensures that the component is run at a single server, when combined with load balancing and under heavy user loads, the load balancing takes place.
- If we rule out the previous case, then, the load balancing mechanism, especially, per component based or per server based, sends request by round robin technique initally(around 128 times or so) and then calculates the effeciency of the response time and then follows the per server based or per component based.
- Meanwhile please ensure that, you have enabled the Sticky LB option under Application using iASAT and please wait for sometime sending requests(probably 130 times) after which it's good to check the mechanism of the sticky bit technique. If it doesn't behaves as it has to then, please let me know and I can help you further on this.
Regards
RG -
How to make IIS plug-in do STICKY load balancing
There are two classes of scalable services: pure and sticky. A pure service
is one where any instance of the application can respond to client requests.
A sticky service is one where a client sends its requests to the same
instance; those requests are not redirected to other instances.
It seems to me that weblogic IIS proxy plug-in does not support the sticky
load balancing.
Could someone give me some information on how to make the proxy sticky?
Is there configuration parameters for this?
Thanks,
-LeiI set the cluster.
It seems to me that there is some problem with the Set-Cookie mechanism of
the plug-in.
Sometime it set the cookie in my browser, sometime it is not.
Even from the wlproxy.log, I could set something like
Fri Aug 03 17:56:12 2001 Hdrs to
client:[Set-Cookie]=[AribaNode=O2tII92qHlP2tpZjUV0m5ued1s6X028cUPu24QcGj1Q25
AE5VXOd!1782877802312707887!ltang.ariba.com!8001!7002; domain=ariba.com;
path=/]
But the cookie is not set in my browser, what might be wrong here?
Thanks,
-Lei
"Eric Gross" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I do believe that this will not work since if clustering is not enabled, a
cookie will not be set on the browser that contains the primary and
secondary server.
You are specifying two different ports in your servers. You need to use
clustering in order to get this functionality with the plugin.Furthermore,
you will achieve fail-over.
Regards,
Eric
"Lei Tang" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Here is what I did for the examples under the bea sample directory.
I put the following in test1/WEB-INF/weblogic.xml
<session-descriptor>
<session-param>
<param-name> CookieDomain </param-name>
<param-value> *.ariba.com </param-value>
</session-param>
<session-param>
<param-name> CookieName </param-name>
<param-value> AribaNode </param-value>
</session-param>
<session-param>
<param-name> CookiePath </param-name>
<param-value> /test1 </param-value>
</session-param>
</session-descriptor>
</weblogic-web-app>
I add the following in iisproxy.ini
# This file contains initialization name/value pairs
# for the IIS/WebLogic plug-in.
WebLogicCluster=ltang.ariba.com:8001,achu.ariba.com:7001
ConnectTimeoutSecs=20
ConnectRetrySecs=2
Debug=ALL
WLLogFile=c:\tmp\wlproxy.log
WlForwardPath=/test1
DynamicServerList=OFF
CookieName=AribaNode
I use SesssionServlet.java as an example
When I involk http://proxy/test1/SessionServlet, I always get 1
if I use
http://proxy/test1/SessionServlet:AribaNode=................................
I could see the session becomes sticky.
If I do not want to use URL rewriting, what should I do in order to makethe
session STICKY
for this example.
Thanks,
-Lei
"Eric Gross" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
If you leave the CookieName untouched on the WebLogic side, then there
should be no reason to make the change in the plug-in.
But yes, you need to make sure the cookie names are the same.
Regards,
Eric
"Mark Vaughn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Actually, you also need to make sure you set the "CookieName" in theplugin.
That let's the plugin read the cookie set by WebLogic to determine
who
the
primary and secondary servers are for that session. Otherwise, theplugin
has no
way of knowing if you are establishing a new session or returning to
an
existing
one. The cookie will tell it if you have a current session and who
it
should
send you to for continuing that session, or failing that session
over.
>>>>
Eric Gross wrote:
Without having clustering enabled, you will not get Sticky load
balancing.
You need to have clustering so that a cookie is sent back to the
client
that
contains information about where it's session is located.
Otherwise,
you
are just going to get round-robin each time.
You can refer to the following page for more information:
http://e-docs.beasys.com/wls/docs61/cluster/servlet.html
Regards,
Eric
"Lei Tang" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
WebLogicCluster=machine1:7001,machine2:7001
ConnectTimeoutSecs=20
ConnectRetrySecs=2
Debug=ALL
WLLogFile=c:\tmp\wlproxy.log
WlForwardPath=/test,/test1
DynamicServerList=OFF
I run two standone (Admin server) weblogic servers on machine1
machine2.
Then I deploy application test.war on machine1 first, then onmachine2.
Should I make machine2 as a managed server and machine1 as an
admi
n
server?
Will this make the session sticky?
Thanks,
-Lei
"Eric Gross" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
It would help us to know how you have iisproxy.ini configured.
Sticky
load
balancing should work fine if you have the plug-in and
WebLogic
Server
setup
correctly.
How have you setup the plug-in?
Thanks,
Eric
"Lei Tang" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
There are two classes of scalable services: pure and sticky.
A
pure
service
is one where any instance of the application can respond to
client
requests.
A sticky service is one where a client sends its requests to
the
same
instance; those requests are not redirected to other
instances.
It seems to me that weblogic IIS proxy plug-in does notsupport
the
sticky
load balancing.
Could someone give me some information on how to make the
proxy
sticky?
Is there configuration parameters for this?
Thanks,
-Lei
.-. Mark Vaughn
/V\ 7024 Corona Dr.
// \\ North Richland Hills, TX 76180
/( )\ [email protected]
^^-^^
"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day;
teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks."
Ben Woodbridge -
IPlanet sticky load balancing question
We have two iPlanet Application Servers v6.0 sp3 and two iPlanet
Enterprise Web servers v4.1. All machines are on the same domain name.
All machines point to the same LDAP server. The application has been
installed on both App servers. Clustering has been configured in the
App server Admin tool to be based upon system load. For non-sticky load
balancing, all works fine, and session information is carried over
properly. However, for sticky load balancing, hits going into either of
the Web servers do not always go back to the App server that first
started the session.
The online iPlanet documentation says it can be done, but we have found
differently. Has anybody else gotten this to work?
Thank you,
David ShadeHi David,
With sticky load balancing enabled, when you execute the application first
time it will go to any kjs depending on your load banancing criteria which
you set (Round robin or server responce or whatever), this applies to only
for the first time when you send request, afterwords it will be executed in
that perticular KJS process only till that KJS is alive, whatever may be
your LoadB creteria.
You please kill that kjs and see, you will be able to see the failover.
Feel free to mail me for any further information.
Sanjeev,
Developer Support Team iAS-India.
David Shade wrote:
We have two iPlanet Application Servers v6.0 sp3 and two iPlanet
Enterprise Web servers v4.1. All machines are on the same domain name.
All machines point to the same LDAP server. The application has been
installed on both App servers. Clustering has been configured in the
App server Admin tool to be based upon system load. For non-sticky load
balancing, all works fine, and session information is carried over
properly. However, for sticky load balancing, hits going into either of
the Web servers do not always go back to the App server that first
started the session.
The online iPlanet documentation says it can be done, but we have found
differently. Has anybody else gotten this to work?
Thank you,
David Shade--
I have never learn not to learn...
------------------------------------------------------------------ -
Sticky load balancing without clustering?
I don't need any type of session replication. I just want to run two
instances of Weblogic on one machine, one IP, two different ports.
If I run a third instance of Weblogic for proxying on the same machine
on yet another port, can I take advantage of the HttpClusterServlet's
sticky load balancing capabilities if the two Weblogic instances I want
to proxy between are not participating in a cluster?
All we require is to have an IP & port that we can hit that will
round-robin the HTTP requests between the two Weblogic instances, and
send all subsequent HTTP requests with the same session to the same
Weblogic instance it sent it to before. Can this work? Thanks in
advance,
mg
Mike Gorman, Director of Architecture
YOUcentric, Inc.
Charlotte, NC
704-643-1000 x518
http://www.youcentric.com
Thought I read somewhere that you must have different IP addresses for each
server
Mike Gorman wrote:
> I don't need any type of session replication. I just want to run two
> instances of Weblogic on one machine, one IP, two different ports.
>
> If I run a third instance of Weblogic for proxying on the same machine
> on yet another port, can I take advantage of the HttpClusterServlet's
> sticky load balancing capabilities if the two Weblogic instances I want
> to proxy between are not participating in a cluster?
>
> All we require is to have an IP & port that we can hit that will
> round-robin the HTTP requests between the two Weblogic instances, and
> send all subsequent HTTP requests with the same session to the same
> Weblogic instance it sent it to before. Can this work? Thanks in
> advance,
>
> mg
>
> --
> Mike Gorman, Director of Architecture
> YOUcentric, Inc.
> Charlotte, NC
> 704-643-1000 x518
> http://www.youcentric.com
-
NAS 4.0sp6 - sticky load balancing
Hi,
Can anyone tell me if sticky load balancing is required/necessary in a
multi process (8 x kjs's) single threaded (each kjs has only one thread)
environment on one machine. We seem to be getting concurrent session
problems between kjs's.
Platform: Solaris 2.6, NAS 4.0sp6
Thanks in advance.In general no, but it depends on how your application is written.
In your case, probably yes, but I am only guessing here.
Session is usually distributed through DSYNC and therefore is
serialisable. However, if certain programmers made their objects
non-seriable then they are forcing the sessions to be stored locally and
sticky will help with sending the requests back to the same engine to
get that session.
In your case, I wonder why you are only using 1 thread per kjs. I assume
your application code is not thread safe and therefore you made the
decision to run multiple kjs with single thread only. Following this, I
believe you might also have programmatically made your sessions
local/non ditributable (because of the thread safe issue), thus if this
is the case you probably will require sticky load balancing.
Tosh wrote:
>
Hi,
Can anyone tell me if sticky load balancing is required/necessary in a
multi process (8 x kjs's) single threaded (each kjs has only one thread)
environment on one machine. We seem to be getting concurrent session
problems between kjs's.
Platform: Solaris 2.6, NAS 4.0sp6
Thanks in advance.--
Han-Dat Luc ([email protected])
Senior Consultant
SUN Professional Services (iPlanet)
o .
o .
O _ ____ _ _
(_) _ \| | __ _ _ __ ___| |_ TM
| | |_) | |/ _` | '_ \ / _ \ __|
| | __/| | (_| | | | | __/ |_
|_|_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|\___|\__|
e-commerce solutions
Sun Microsystems Australia Pty Ltd -
Sticky load balancing across 2 ports with cookies
Hi,
I have a server configuration where I have 1 top level Apache server that deals with SSL termination (and handles static content) and proxy passes dynamic content onto 2 Tomcat servers on 2 ports, one for http requests (9001) and one for the requests that were secure, but have now been un-encrypted by Apache (9002). My 2 Tomcat servers are load balanced using a CSS and I need this load balancing to stick to the tomcat servers regardless of port so that the user is stuck to the same Tomcat server for their entire session.
I would like to use arrowpoint cookies to perform this stickyness, but the documentation suggests that arrowpoint cookie load balancing (in fact any cookie based load balancing) requires the port to be specified in the content rule. Is this correct? Is my only option to use the source IP for stickyness? I don't understand why the port should be required if the stickyness is via a cookie. Can I not simply configure my 2 tomcat servers as services with no port and add a single content rule that load balances these services using arrowpoint-cookie advanced balancing?
service tomcat1
ip address x.x.x.x
active
service tomcat2
ip address x.x.x.x
active
owner me
content sticky
vip address x.x.x.x
protocol tcp
url "/*"
add service tomcat-1
add service tomcat-2
advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
activeAngela-
The issue with port is that cookies are very specifically HTTP only and the CSS has no way of knowing what protocol will hit a VIP prior to trying to address it as HTTP. Your issue is actually a bit clearer than it is initially led to be - you can still use 2 different rules by using the configuration below.
However, you might be headed for a headache if you don't implicitly control the client's actions. By default, browsers don't generally send cookies cross-protocol and definitely not cross-domain. Use something like httpwatch or iewatch to check out the headers your client sends to your site. Make sure when the 200ok arrives with the set-cookie that the client sends that cookie in all preceeding packets that are HTTP and HTTPS both.
service tomcat1
string "tomcat1"
ip address x.x.x.x
active
service tomcat2
string "tomcat2"
ip address x.x.x.x
active
owner me
content sticky9001
vip address x.x.x.x
protocol tcp
url "/*"
port 9001
add service tomcat-1
add service tomcat-2
advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
active
content sticky9002
vip address x.x.x.x
protocol tcp
url "/*"
port 9002
add service tomcat-1
add service tomcat-2
advanced-balance arrowpoint-cookie
active
With this configuration, the CSS will use the "string" as the cookie value. So if the client were to recieve set-cookie: ArrowpointCookie=tomcat1, it should use it for either rule, and end up on tomcat1 accessing either VIP.
Regards,
Chris -
Sticky load balancing not working because of Address Translation
This came up before - see below. I don't understand what the
soltion is/was.
WL Server puts it's ip address in the WebLogicSession cookie
which is an internal address 192.168.201.41
WL proxy knows WL Server only by an external address like 139.141.38.21. Since
it does not know of any WLS with an IP
address of 192.168.201.41, it round-robins the request instead
of sending it to the primary WLS.
Any help is much appreciated.
Mike Reiche
Robert Patrick <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>A very typical configuration is to put the web server in the DMZ (i.e.,
>between
>an outer and inner firewall) and proxy the requests from the web server
>to the
>WebLogic server (which sits behind the inner firewall). Since all of
>these
>proxied requests use HTTP and a single port, the only port that needs
>to be
>opened in the inner firewall is an HTTP port (the outer firewall will
>only need
>an HTTP and/or HTTPS port opened).
>
>Hope this helps,
>Robert
>
>Eytan Ben-Meir wrote:
>
>> Thanks Patrick,
>>
>> May be you can suggest options for securing a WLS behind a firewall?
>>
>> Thanks again,
>>
>> Eytan
>>
>> Robert Patrick wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > The problem is that we encode location information (e.g., IP address(es))
>> > in the session id. If the plugin sees a session id, it decodes the
>> > session id to find out where to route the request (i.e., which server
>in
>> > the cluster contains the HttpSession object for that session). Since
>the
>> > plugin cannot find the machine whose IP address is encoded in the
>session
>> > id (because of the network address translation), this will not work.
> In
>> > general, distributed application software needs to be modified to
>be
>> > capable of handling network address translation -- to my knowledge,
>> > WebLogic Server has not been modified to support this feature (though
>the
>> > Enterprise version of the product has had this support for years).
>> >
>> > Hope this helps,
>> > Robert
>> >
>> > Eytan Ben-Meir wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > Configuration:
>> > > WLS 4.5.1 on Solaris 2.7 inside a firewall.
>> > > SonicWall firewall with NAT (Network Address Translation).
>> > > Netscape Enterprise Server 4.0 outside the firewall with Weblogic
>> > > NSAPI-BRIDGE (sp 5)
>> > >
>> > > The problem:
>> > > When a browser request is sent to the NE web-erver (directed to
>the
>> > > firewall who then redirects to a Weblogic servlet).
>> > > IF The servlet creates a httpsession (with or without cookies)
>the
>> > > request fails (the firewall blocks a request directed directly
>at the
>> > > non-routable ip address of the Weblogic machine inside the firewall.
>> > > IF on the other hand the servlet does not create a http session,
>all
>> > > works fine.??????????
>> > > Does any body know something about this????
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > >
>> > > Eytan
>
This isn't my problem.
"Mike Reiche" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>This came up before - see below. I don't understand what the
>soltion is/was.
>
>WL Server puts it's ip address in the WebLogicSession cookie
> which is an internal address 192.168.201.41
>
>WL proxy knows WL Server only by an external address like 139.141.38.21.
> Since
>it does not know of any WLS with an IP
>address of 192.168.201.41, it round-robins the request instead
>of sending it to the primary WLS.
>
>Any help is much appreciated.
>
>Mike Reiche
>
>Robert Patrick <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>A very typical configuration is to put the web server in the DMZ (i.e.,
>>between
>>an outer and inner firewall) and proxy the requests from the web server
>>to the
>>WebLogic server (which sits behind the inner firewall). Since all of
>>these
>>proxied requests use HTTP and a single port, the only port that needs
>>to be
>>opened in the inner firewall is an HTTP port (the outer firewall will
>>only need
>>an HTTP and/or HTTPS port opened).
>>
>>Hope this helps,
>>Robert
>>
>>Eytan Ben-Meir wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Patrick,
>>>
>>> May be you can suggest options for securing a WLS behind a firewall?
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>>
>>> Eytan
>>>
>>> Robert Patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > The problem is that we encode location information (e.g., IP address(es))
>>> > in the session id. If the plugin sees a session id, it decodes
>the
>>> > session id to find out where to route the request (i.e., which server
>>in
>>> > the cluster contains the HttpSession object for that session).
>Since
>>the
>>> > plugin cannot find the machine whose IP address is encoded in the
>>session
>>> > id (because of the network address translation), this will not work.
>> In
>>> > general, distributed application software needs to be modified to
>>be
>>> > capable of handling network address translation -- to my knowledge,
>>> > WebLogic Server has not been modified to support this feature (though
>>the
>>> > Enterprise version of the product has had this support for years).
>>> >
>>> > Hope this helps,
>>> > Robert
>>> >
>>> > Eytan Ben-Meir wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi,
>>> > >
>>> > > Configuration:
>>> > > WLS 4.5.1 on Solaris 2.7 inside a firewall.
>>> > > SonicWall firewall with NAT (Network Address Translation).
>>> > > Netscape Enterprise Server 4.0 outside the firewall with Weblogic
>>> > > NSAPI-BRIDGE (sp 5)
>>> > >
>>> > > The problem:
>>> > > When a browser request is sent to the NE web-erver (directed to
>>the
>>> > > firewall who then redirects to a Weblogic servlet).
>>> > > IF The servlet creates a httpsession (with or without cookies)
>>the
>>> > > request fails (the firewall blocks a request directed directly
>>at the
>>> > > non-routable ip address of the Weblogic machine inside the firewall.
>>> > > IF on the other hand the servlet does not create a http session,
>>all
>>> > > works fine.??????????
>>> > > Does any body know something about this????
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > >
>>> > > Eytan
>>
>
-
Apache plug-in won't load balance requests evenly on cluster
I can't seem to get the Apache plug-in to actually do round-robin load balancing
of HTTP
requests. It does random-robin, as I like to call it, since the plug-in will usually
hit all the
servers in the cluster but in a random fashion.
I've got three managed servers:
192.168.1.5:8001 (WL6 on Linux) 192.168.1.2:8001 (WL6 on Linux) 192.168.1.7:8001
(WL6 on Linux)
Admin server on 192.168.1.7:7000 (WL6 on W2k)
My Apache server is 1.3.9 (RedHat SSL) on 192.168.1.52.
The log file for each servers has something like this:
####<Apr 19, 2001 1:18:54 AM MDT> <Info> <Cluster> <neptune> <cluster1server1>
<main> <system> <> <000102> <Joined cluster cluster1 at address 225.0.0.5 on port
8001>
####<Apr 19, 2001 1:19:31 AM MDT> <Info> <Cluster> <neptune> <cluster1server1>
<ExecuteThread: '9' for queue: 'default'> <> <> <000127> <Adding
3773576126129840579S:192.168.1.2:[8001,8001,7002,7002,8001,7002,-1]:192.168.1.52
to the cluster> ####<Apr 19, 2001 1:19:31 AM MDT> <Info> <Cluster> <neptune>
<cluster1server1> <ExecuteThread: '11' for queue: 'default'> <> <> <000127> <Adding
-6393447100509727955S:192.168.1.5:[8001,8001,7002,7002,8001,7002,-1]:192.168.1.52
to the cluster>
So I believe I have correctly created a cluster, although I did not bother to
assign
replication groups for HTTP session replication (yet).
The Apache debug output indicates it knows about all three servers and I can see
it
doing the "random-robin" load balancing. Here is the output:
Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 Initializing lastIndex=2 for a list of length=3 Thu Apr
19
00:20:53 2001 Init Srvr# [1] = [192.168.1.2:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077590272
numSk ip=134940256 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 Init Srvr# [2] = [192.168.1.5:8001]
load=1077584792 isGood=1077590272 numSk ip=134940256 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001
Init Srvr# [3] = [192.168.1.7:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077590272 numSk
ip=134940256 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 INFO: SSL is not configured Thu Apr 19
00:20:53 2001 Now trying whatever is on the list; ci->canUseSrvrList = 1 Thu Apr
19
00:20:53 2001 INFO: New NON-SSL URL Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 general list: trying
connect to '192.168.1.7'/8001 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 Connected to 192.168.1.7:8001
Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 INFO: sysSend 320 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 INFO:
Reader::fill(): first=0 last=0 toRead=4096 Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 parsed all
headers
OK Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 Initializing lastIndex=1 for a list of length=3 Thu
Apr 19
00:21:06 2001 ###Response### : Srvr# [1] = [192.168.1.5:8001] load=1077584792
isGood=1077 546628 numSkip=1077546628 Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 ###Response###
: Srvr# [2] = [192.168.1.2:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077 546628
numSkip=1077546628 Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 ###Response### : Srvr# [3] =
[192.168.1.7:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077 546628 numSkip=1077546628 Thu Apr
19 00:21:06 2001 INFO: Reader::fill(): first=0 last=0 toRead=4096
Basically, the lastIndex=XXX appears to be random. It may do round-robin for 4
or 5
connections but then always it resorts to randomly directing new connections.
This is what the configuration looks like using the plug-in's
/weblogic?__WebLogicBridgeConfig URL:
Weblogic Apache Bridge Configuration parameters:
WebLogic Cluster List:
1.Host: '192.168.1.2' Port: 8001 Primary
General Server List:
1.Host: '192.168.1.2' Port: 8001
2.Host: '192.168.1.5' Port: 8001
3.Host: '192.168.1.7' Port: 8001
DefaultFileName: ''
PathTrim: '/weblogic'
PathPrepend: '' ConnectTimeoutSecs:
'10' ConnectRetrySecs: '2'
HungServerRecoverSecs: '300'
MaxPostSize: '0'
StatPath: false
CookieName: JSESSIONID
Idempotent:
ON FileCaching:
ON ErrorPage: ''
DisableCookie2Server: OFF
Can someone please help to shed some light on this? I would be really grateful,
thanks!
JeffRight - it means that the only configuration which can do perfect round-robin is a
single plugin (non-Apache, or single-process Apache) - all others essentially do random
(sort of, but it can skew test results during first N requests).
Robert Patrick <[email protected]> wrote:
Dimitri,
The way Apache works is that is spawns a bunch of child processes and the parent process
that listens on the port delegates the processing of each request to one of the child
processes. This means that the load-balancing dome by the plugin before the session ID is
assigned does not do perfect round-robining because there are multiple copies of the plugin
loaded in the multiple child processes. This situation is similar to the one you would get
by running multiple proxy servers on different machines with the NES/iPlanet and IIS
plugins.
As I pointed out in my response to Jeff, attempting to address this problem with IPC
machanisms would only solve the single machine problem and most people deploy multiple
proxy servers to avoid a single point of failure...
Hope this helps,
Robert
Dimitri Rakitine wrote:
Hrm. This is strange - I thought that all the information nesessary for a
'sticky' load-balancing (primary/secondary) is contained in the cookie/session info,
so, the particular plug-in implementation should not make any difference. For
load-balancing - statistically, given large enough sampling base, Apache plug-in
should perform just a well as NS one (unless apache is somehow misconfigured and
calls fork() for each new request).
Jeff Calog <[email protected]> wrote:
Robert,
Thanks for the sanity reply, you are definitely right. I used Netscape 3.0 on
Win2k and it did perfect round-robin load balancing to my servers.
<raving>
BEA - ARE YOU LISTENING? STOP TELLING PEOPLE YOUR APACHE PLUG-IN IS A VIABLE
LOAD BALANCING SOLUTION! It's worthless for load balancing!
</raving>
In some tests, as many as 90% of my connections/requests would be sent to a single
server. There should be something in the release notes like "By the way, the
Apache plug-in is only advertised as doing round-robin load balancing, in reality
it doesn't work worth a darn".
I'm surprised they don't used shared memory or some other technique (pipes, sockets,
signals, writing to /tmp, anything) for interprocess communication to fix that.
Jeff
Robert Patrick <[email protected]> wrote:
Yes, the problem lies in the fact that Apache uses multiple processes
instead of
multiple threads to process requests. Therefore, you end up with multiple
processes all
with the WebLogic plugin loaded into them (and they cannot see one another)...
Hopefully, Apache 2.0 when it comes out will allow the plugin to do a
better job...
Jeff Calog wrote:
I can't seem to get the Apache plug-in to actually do round-robin loadbalancing
of HTTP
requests. It does random-robin, as I like to call it, since the plug-inwill usually
hit all the
servers in the cluster but in a random fashion.
I've got three managed servers:
192.168.1.5:8001 (WL6 on Linux) 192.168.1.2:8001 (WL6 on Linux) 192.168.1.7:8001
(WL6 on Linux)
Admin server on 192.168.1.7:7000 (WL6 on W2k)
My Apache server is 1.3.9 (RedHat SSL) on 192.168.1.52.
The log file for each servers has something like this:
####<Apr 19, 2001 1:18:54 AM MDT> <Info> <Cluster> <neptune> <cluster1server1>
<main> <system> <> <000102> <Joined cluster cluster1 at address 225.0.0.5on port
8001>
####<Apr 19, 2001 1:19:31 AM MDT> <Info> <Cluster> <neptune> <cluster1server1>
<ExecuteThread: '9' for queue: 'default'> <> <> <000127> <Adding
3773576126129840579S:192.168.1.2:[8001,8001,7002,7002,8001,7002,-1]:192.168.1.52
to the cluster> ####<Apr 19, 2001 1:19:31 AM MDT> <Info> <Cluster><neptune>
<cluster1server1> <ExecuteThread: '11' for queue: 'default'> <> <><000127> <Adding
-6393447100509727955S:192.168.1.5:[8001,8001,7002,7002,8001,7002,-1]:192.168.1.52
to the cluster>
So I believe I have correctly created a cluster, although I did notbother to
assign
replication groups for HTTP session replication (yet).
The Apache debug output indicates it knows about all three serversand I can see
it
doing the "random-robin" load balancing. Here is the output:
Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 Initializing lastIndex=2 for a list of length=3Thu Apr
19
00:20:53 2001 Init Srvr# [1] = [192.168.1.2:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077590272
numSk ip=134940256 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 Init Srvr# [2] = [192.168.1.5:8001]
load=1077584792 isGood=1077590272 numSk ip=134940256 Thu Apr 19 00:20:532001
Init Srvr# [3] = [192.168.1.7:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077590272numSk
ip=134940256 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 INFO: SSL is not configured ThuApr 19
00:20:53 2001 Now trying whatever is on the list; ci->canUseSrvrList= 1 Thu Apr
19
00:20:53 2001 INFO: New NON-SSL URL Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 generallist: trying
connect to '192.168.1.7'/8001 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 Connected to192.168.1.7:8001
Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001 INFO: sysSend 320 Thu Apr 19 00:20:53 2001INFO:
Reader::fill(): first=0 last=0 toRead=4096 Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001parsed all
headers
OK Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 Initializing lastIndex=1 for a list oflength=3 Thu
Apr 19
00:21:06 2001 ###Response### : Srvr# [1] = [192.168.1.5:8001] load=1077584792
isGood=1077 546628 numSkip=1077546628 Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 ###Response###
: Srvr# [2] = [192.168.1.2:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077 546628
numSkip=1077546628 Thu Apr 19 00:21:06 2001 ###Response### : Srvr#[3] =
[192.168.1.7:8001] load=1077584792 isGood=1077 546628 numSkip=1077546628Thu Apr
19 00:21:06 2001 INFO: Reader::fill(): first=0 last=0 toRead=4096
Basically, the lastIndex=XXX appears to be random. It may do round-robinfor 4
or 5
connections but then always it resorts to randomly directing new connections.
This is what the configuration looks like using the plug-in's
/weblogic?__WebLogicBridgeConfig URL:
Weblogic Apache Bridge Configuration parameters:
WebLogic Cluster List:
1.Host: '192.168.1.2' Port: 8001 Primary
General Server List:
1.Host: '192.168.1.2' Port: 8001
2.Host: '192.168.1.5' Port: 8001
3.Host: '192.168.1.7' Port: 8001
DefaultFileName: ''
PathTrim: '/weblogic'
PathPrepend: '' ConnectTimeoutSecs:
'10' ConnectRetrySecs: '2'
HungServerRecoverSecs: '300'
MaxPostSize: '0'
StatPath: false
CookieName: JSESSIONID
Idempotent:
ON FileCaching:
ON ErrorPage: ''
DisableCookie2Server: OFF
Can someone please help to shed some light on this? I would be reallygrateful,
thanks!
Jeff
Dimitri--
Dimitri -
Clustering problems and load balancing question
I am using Weblogic 6.1. My Windows NT environment consists of 10 web client-simulator
machines, 2 App. Server machines and one database server machine. I have defined
one cluster on each app. server. Each cluster is running 3 Weblogic instances, or
so it should be when I fix my problems!
My questions/problems are the following:
1. Can I use a software dispatcher to perform workload balancing between the 2 weblogic
clusters? That is, the client-simulator machines send the requests to the software
dispatcher which performs workload balancing between the 2 Weblogic clusters. The
clusters perform round-robin amongst all instances. Note that the documentation only
talks about Hardware Balancing.
2. I am having problems with my multicast IP addresses. For instance, on one App.
Server machine, I am using the multicast IP address: 239.0.0.1 for MyCluster. When
I start the Admin Server, I get a JDBC error: "... multicast socket error: Request
Time Out". I have used the utils.MulticastTest utility which shows the packets not
being received:
I (S1) sent message num 1
I (S1) sent message num 2
I (S1) sent message num 3
I (S1) sent message num 4
What am I doing wrong?
3. Re. the cluster configuration:
NOTE: I have executed my workload using 2 independent App. Server machines with a
software dispatcher - no clustering. Each App. Server used a jdbc connection pool
of 84 database connections. The db connections happened to become my bottleneck.
When I tried to increase the number of connections in the jdbc pool, throughput decreased
dramatically. Thus, I decided to add a cluster of Weblogic instances to each one
of my 8 x 900Mhz machines in order to scale up. Unfortunatly, adding clusters have
not been that simple a task - probably because I am totally new to the Web Application
Server world!
Here is what I've got so far:
I have obtained 3 static IP addresses for the 3 instances of Weblogic instances that
I wish to run within the cluster. All servers in the cluster use port number 80.
There is a corresponding DNS entry for each IP address. My base assumption is that
one of these instances will double up as the Administration Server... Is it true,
or do I need to define a separate Admin server if I wish to run 3 Weblogic instances
(each with a connection pool of 84 database connections for a total of 252 database
connections)?
Do I need to re-deploy my applications for the cluster? And if so, would this explain
why I am having problem starting my Admin Server?
I think this is it for now. Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks in advance,
Guylaine.
Guylaine Cantin wrote:
> I am using Weblogic 6.1. My Windows NT environment consists of 10 web client-simulator
> machines, 2 App. Server machines and one database server machine. I have defined
> one cluster on each app. server. Each cluster is running 3 Weblogic instances, or
> so it should be when I fix my problems!
>
> My questions/problems are the following:
>
> 1. Can I use a software dispatcher to perform workload balancing between the 2 weblogic
> clusters? That is, the client-simulator machines send the requests to the software
> dispatcher which performs workload balancing between the 2 Weblogic clusters. The
> clusters perform round-robin amongst all instances. Note that the documentation only
> talks about Hardware Balancing.
>
We also support software load balancers (for e.g. resonate)
The software dispatcher should be intelligent enough to decode the
cookie and route the request to the appropriate servers. This is
necessary to maintain sticky load balancing.
> 2. I am having problems with my multicast IP addresses. For instance, on one App.
> Server machine, I am using the multicast IP address: 239.0.0.1 for MyCluster. When
> I start the Admin Server, I get a JDBC error: "... multicast socket error: Request
> Time Out". I have used the utils.MulticastTest utility which shows the packets not
> being received:
>
> I (S1) sent message num 1
> I (S1) sent message num 2
> I (S1) sent message num 3
> I (S1) sent message num 4
> ...
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
You should run the above utility from multiple windows and see if each
of them being recognized or not.
i.e. java utils.MulticastTest -N S1 -A 239.0.0.1
java utils.MulticastTest -N S1 -A 239.0.0.1
> 3. Re. the cluster configuration:
>
> NOTE: I have executed my workload using 2 independent App. Server machines with a
> software dispatcher - no clustering. Each App. Server used a jdbc connection pool
> of 84 database connections. The db connections happened to become my bottleneck.
> When I tried to increase the number of connections in the jdbc pool, throughput decreased
> dramatically. Thus, I decided to add a cluster of Weblogic instances to each one
> of my 8 x 900Mhz machines in order to scale up. Unfortunatly, adding clusters have
> not been that simple a task - probably because I am totally new to the Web Application
> Server world!
>
You have to stress test your application several times and set
maxCapacity of the conn pool accordingly.
> Here is what I've got so far:
>
> I have obtained 3 static IP addresses for the 3 instances of Weblogic instances that
> I wish to run within the cluster. All servers in the cluster use port number 80.
> There is a corresponding DNS entry for each IP address. My base assumption is that
> one of these instances will double up as the Administration Server... Is it true,
> or do I need to define a separate Admin server if I wish to run 3 Weblogic instances
> (each with a connection pool of 84 database connections for a total of 252 database
> connections)?
BEA recommends to use Admin server for administrative tasks only
like configuring new deployments, jdbc conn pools, adding users etc..
It's not a good idea to have admin server part of cluster.
>
> Do I need to re-deploy my applications for the cluster? And if so, would this explain
> why I am having problem starting my Admin Server?
>
You have to target all your apps to the Cluster.
> I think this is it for now. Any help will be greatly appreciated!
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Guylaine.
>
-
Clustering not Load balancing on solaris with apache
apache weblogic plugin does not do round-robin , it's kind of random when
direct the request to the appserver. anyone has seen this problem?
weblogic5.1 sp9. solaris 2.7 jre1.3.1 rc2
Actually, the random load-balancing when using Apache is caused by the fact
that Apache (<2.0) spawns multiple processes, so single Apache instance
will have several plug-in instances running.
Mike Reiche <[email protected]> wrote:
> You are using the weblogic plug-in, aren't you?
> Only new requests are round-robinned. A second request from the same browser
> is sent to the same server it hit the first time (sticky load-balancing).
> Mike
> "Tony Lu" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>apache weblogic plugin does not do round-robin , it's kind of random
>>when
>>direct the request to the appserver. anyone has seen this problem?
>>
>>weblogic5.1 sp9. solaris 2.7 jre1.3.1 rc2
>>
>>
Dimitri
-
LRT224 load balancing, switching between circuits "resets" secure sites
We have noticed a problem with certian secure websites when load balancing is enabled on the LRT224. The company has a DSL and cable circuit, static I/P's on both. Running Speedtest shows a 30m pipe with load balancing enabled, about 16m on each when off. When utilizing load balancing, if accessing banking, government or otherwise more secure sites, those pages will reset to the login consistently. If turning off load balancing and picking either circuit, this does not occur. We have 2 identical LRT224's and the both do it. I have contacted Linksys customer support to no avail. Firmware is up to date. This is entirely replicateable on both units and very consistent. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Chris
Chris_Shalvoy wrote:
chadster766,
i have updated the firmware as directed and the result is the same. as i indicated, it's easily reproduced by just switching the router to a single circuit (fail over mode) and those sites do not reset. i have 2 exact units and they both perform the same. for a quick fix, i just turn off load balancing, perform the banking functions and then return it to load balancing. not hard just doesn't seem this revision addresses the problem but thank you for the assistance to date.Did you enable Sticky Load Balancing?Use the below link to make sure the feature is functioning properly. Your IP Address shouldn't change if it's working:http://www.mccuesoft.com/myinfo.php -
Hi,
We are having problems configuring Alteon for weblogic clustering,
simply it is not working. We took the documentation from the BEA site &
applied them to the switch without any luck.
Has anybody got the configuration files etc for Alteon for basic load
balancing? It would be really helpful for us.
TIA,
VikasWe are having problems configuring Alteon for weblogic clustering,
simply it is not working. We took the documentation from the BEA site &
applied them to the switch without any luck.
Has anybody got the configuration files etc for Alteon for basic load
balancing? It would be really helpful for us.For basic load balancing, use Alteon round robin and give it the WL
addresses. Then you have to hit the balanced IP address of the Alteon and it
should route through.
Or are you trying to use the advanced Alteon features to do sticky load
balancing by parsing the WL cookie?
Peace,
Cameron Purdy
Tangosol, Inc.
Clustering Weblogic? You're either using Coherence, or you should be!
Download a Tangosol Coherence eval today at http://www.tangosol.com/
"Vikas Chawla" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
> -
Cluster/load balance weblogic using L4 switch like Alteon
Can I install weblogic as a standalone server on 2 or more server and
cluster/load balance weblogic using a hardware balancer like Alteon Layer4
switch (of course I will use a centralised storage to maintain a single copy
of data which will eliminate syncronizing problem among servers)?
BTW, Alteon can support persistent binding. The reason to use a Layer 4
switch is that it is very fast, and this will make the application server
layer transparent to client, the client can think this is a single server
(it don't need to know whether there are 5 weblogic servers or 20 weblogic
servers behind switch), and hardware are more reliable, sacalable and fast.
I am not sure whether the normal weblogic clustered servers need to
share/exchange info on the running memory, if it does, this approach will
fail.
So My understanding is:
Alteon with WL 6.0 can do load balancing for:
entity bean
stateless session bean
but can't do load balancing for:
stateful session bean (will persistent/sticky binding solve part of the
problem except fail-over)
in-memory replication
am I right?
Pao Wan
"Don Ferguson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> It is possible to configure Alteon to understand the WebLogic 6.0 cookie
format
> and have a proxy-less cluster configuration that performs load balancing
and
> fail over of session state.
>
> It is also possible to configure Alteon's hardware-based SSL decryption
for really
> fast HTTPS processing.
>
> We are working on a white paper that describes how to configure Alteon for
use
> with WebLogic Server 6.0.
>
> -Don
>
>
> Robert Patrick wrote:
>
> > Cameron,
> >
> > I believe that BEA tested their new proxy-less web clustering solution
with
> > load-balancing products from Alteon and several other vendors
(Arrowpoint ?--
> > which is now Cisco). However, it was my understanding that these
products do
> > not understand how to decrypt our cookies and extract IP addresses but
rather
> > these products are capable of doing sticky load balancing based on the
Session
> > ID contained in our cookie.
> >
> > If this is correct, then what this means is that when the primary server
fails,
> > the request will be routed to "some other server" in the cluster but not
> > necessarily the one that holds the secondary copy of the user's session.
The
> > change in WLS 6.0 is that WLS will accept these misdirected requests and
it will
> > go out to the correct server and "migrate" the session to the server
that
> > received the request making that server the new primary (and
regenerating the
> > Session ID).
> >
> > I am sure if this is wrong that our product manager or one of our
engineers will
> > correct me (please?)...
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Robert
> >
> > Cameron Purdy wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Robert,
> > >
> > > FWIW - There are several vendors (Primeon? Arrowpoint?) who claim to
> > > understand WL cookies and parse the IPs out. (I haven't verified it
myself
> > > though.)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cameron Purdy
> > > Tangosol, Inc.
> > > http://www.tangosol.com
> > > +1.617.623.5782
> > > WebLogic Consulting Available
> > >
> > > "Robert Patrick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > There are not any hardware vendors (yet) that can understand
WebLogic's
> > > session
> > > > ID. While you might be able to use the load balancer without the
proxy on
> > > 5.1,
> > > > you would not be able to take advantage of in-memory replication
failover
> > > unless
> > > > you only had two machines in the cluster. Like you said, everything
will
> > > work
> > > > with 6.0 regardless of how the load balancer works (though you
really,
> > > really
> > > > want to minimize the number of times the requests come into the
wrong
> > > server by
> > > > utilizing sticky load balancing).
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps,
> > > > Robert
> > > >
> > > > Cameron Purdy wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Rajesh,
> > > > >
> > > > > I meant that it would work in lieu of a proxy (such as Apache or
NES)
> > > with
> > > > > 5.1, but only if both the hw load balancer and WL were set up to
use
> > > > > cookies. Some hw load balancers rely on IP and that doesn't
work -- AOL
> > > > > connections for example can change the source IP on the fly.
Others
> > > produce
> > > > > their own cookies, that will work. Some even can use WL cookies
and
> > > parse
> > > > > them to determine where to go. According to what I've read, with
6.0 if
> > > the
> > > > > WL primary dies or for some other reason the request shows up at
the
> > > "wrong"
> > > > > server, it will be handled correctly. That means you are pretty
safe
> > > with
> > > > > hw load balancers and 6.0, almost regardless of the sticky
> > > implementation
> > > > > that they use.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Cameron Purdy
> > > > > Tangosol, Inc.
> > > > > http://www.tangosol.com
> > > > > +1.617.623.5782
> > > > > WebLogic Consulting Available
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rajesh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Cameron,
> > > > > > Can you elaborate on how it would work with WL5.1 since no in
memory
> > > > > replication
> > > > > > would happen if the servers are standalone.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Cameron Purdy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > >Yes, this will work fine with WL6. (WL5.1 will work fine as
long as
> > > > > cookies
> > > > > > >are used by the load balancer.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >--
> > > > > > >Cameron Purdy
> > > > > > >Tangosol, Inc.
> > > > > > >http://www.tangosol.com
> > > > > > >+1.617.623.5782
> > > > > > >WebLogic Consulting Available
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >"paowan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:[email protected]...
> > > > > > >> Can I install weblogic as a standalone server on 2 or more
server
> > > and
> > > > > > >> cluster/load balance weblogic using a hardware balancer like
Alteon
> > > > > Layer4
> > > > > > >> switch (of course I will use a centralised storage to
maintain a
> > > single
> > > > > > >copy
> > > > > > >> of data which will eliminate syncronizing problem among
servers)?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> BTW, Alteon can support persistent binding. The reason to use
a
> > > Layer
> > > > > > >4
> > > > > > >> switch is that it is very fast, and this will make the
application
> > > > > server
> > > > > > >> layer transparent to client, the client can think this is a
single
> > > > > server
> > > > > > >> (it don't need to know whether there are 5 weblogic servers
or 20
> > > > > weblogic
> > > > > > >> servers behind switch), and hardware are more reliable,
sacalable
> > > and
> > > > > > >fast.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I am not sure whether the normal weblogic clustered servers
need to
> > > > > > >> share/exchange info on the running memory, if it does, this
> > > approach
> > > > > will
> > > > > > >> fail.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
>
-
Hardware load balancing with session stickiness
Hello,
We are looking for a hardware based solution to load balance 4
unclustered weblogic servers. These servers are software replicas of
each other and share a common database. We need a solution that
provides session level server stickiness based on jsessionid as both a
cookie and url rewrite. Currently we have Cisco load balancers which
do not handle the url rewrite due to the fact the the load balancer
only "sees" what is after the question mark in the url and the
jsessionid is before the question mark. Example:
http://somehost.com/some/url.jsp;jsessionid=26D5C566075663ABD8E17AD255974323?parm=value
I'm sure we are not the only ones trying to do this. Any suggestions
would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Alan George
Having worked on Cisco load balancer and WLS clustered, you would loose sessions
when the requests are failed over.
S
"Shawn Kircher" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Has anyone got this type of scenario working where you load balance sticky
>sessions
>from a Cisco load balancer between non-clustered weblogic servers?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Shawn
>
>"Aravind Krishnasamy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>F5 or BigIp provides hardware level load balancing and it injects date
>>inside weblogic cookie and maintains server affinity.
>>Thanks
>>Aravind
>>"ageorge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> We are looking for a hardware based solution to load balance 4
>>> unclustered weblogic servers. These servers are software replicas
>>of
>>> each other and share a common database. We need a solution that
>>> provides session level server stickiness based on jsessionid as both
>>a
>>> cookie and url rewrite. Currently we have Cisco load balancers which
>>> do not handle the url rewrite due to the fact the the load balancer
>>> only "sees" what is after the question mark in the url and the
>>> jsessionid is before the question mark. Example:
>>>
>>>
>>http://somehost.com/some/url.jsp;jsessionid=26D5C566075663ABD8E17AD255974323
>>?parm=value
>>>
>>> I'm sure we are not the only ones trying to do this. Any suggestions
>>> would be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Alan George
>>
>>
>
Maybe you are looking for
-
Mexican report A-29 'Declaration Informativa de Operaciones con Terceros"
hello Forum Paulo Evaristo indicated that report ( Mexican Vendor payment report: - A-29 format "'Declaration Informativa de Operaciones con Terceros") is being worked on by SAP and will be available for 'end of this month' . Can you confirm you mean
-
Would someone be so kind to help convert the attached LV version 5.1 files to version 11? Much appreciated, LAW Solved! Go to Solution. Attachments: AWG.VI 160 KB AWG.LLB 420 KB
-
About to buy new 2013 iMac, can i use bootcamp?
Hi All I am about to buy a new iMac. I need to know which version of windows is the most robust using Bootcamp. I am reading the forums and it seems people are having all sorts of issues. 1. I need native windows as I need to run 3D Studio Max and h
-
Hi what is the best way to insert into 4 DEPENDENT tables? i have tables like: Cat_tbl (id, name) sub1_tbl (id, name, idcat) sub2_tbl (id, name, idsub1) sub3_tbl (id, name, address, phone1, phone2, idsub2) * Is it better to build a form which insert
-
How to remove end of line from string?
Hello, I'd like to remove ends of line from the string. I've tried: static final Pattern END_LINE_PATTERN = Pattern.compile("$+"); strBuf.append(input); Matcher m = END_LINE_PATTERN.matcher(input); int startIndex = -1; int endInde