Clustering and failover

Sorry if this message was posted on more than one forum.
          Here is the scenario:
          We have 2 instances (A, B) running on a clustered server environment.
          1. Shutdown Server A. All sessions on Server A fail to Server B.
          2. Restart Server A. New sessions will be load balanced to A, and sessions that have activity on B will be replicated to A.
          3. Shutdown Server B. At this point, we will lose sessions that did not have activity between the time that A was restarted (step 2) and B was shutdown (step 3).
          This is because session replication is only triggered when a request occurs that updates the session object. (correct?)
          What is the best solution, in this case, to replicate the session of B to A when we bring down B.
          Thanks for your help
          V Prakash

One way is:
          When serverA is brought up, you can have a JSP page on serverB that gets all the sessions and access (a simple ping) to all the sessions which will force the replication on to serverA.
          I am not sure it will help in your scenario because, the session cookie (sent by the browser) does not get updated.
          When serverA is down the sessionID on serverA is gone.
          So when serverB is down and serverA is backup(assuming there were no requests to serverB within same session)
          even if the client request goes to serverA, the client will send a session cookie that serverA cannot understand.
          The only option in your case to have session info persisted to database or file..

Similar Messages

Failover clusterign... How similar do the primary and failover instance need to be in a failover cluster?

How similar do the primary and failover instance need to be in a failover cluster?
Does the number of database have to match, naming, general config etc...
Mr Shaw

In failover clustering, you use shared storage so the number of databases is irrelevant since only one node can see/access the shared storage at any given point in time. Ideally, the server configuration should be the same on all of the nodes to minimize
potential issues that may impact downtime. However, you need to consider licensing/# of CPU-cores and implementation cost, especially if you are only using the other nodes as standby. As far as licensing is concerned, the standby has to have the same or fewer
number of CPU-cores as the primary node to be covered by licensing. Besides, you don't want your standby node to be more powerful than your primary node. This is why the option to have a hybrid deployment of having a physical server as the primary node and
virtual machine for standby nodes is now supported.
Edwin Sarmiento SQL Server MVP | Microsoft Certified Master
Blog |
Twitter | LinkedIn
SQL Server High Availability and Disaster Recover Deep Dive Course

Clustering and CF9 Standard?

Hi,
I have a couple of questions that I was hoping to get answered around ColdFusion 9 and clustering. Currently, we run CF8 and IIS on the same box with a dedicated db server and serve up about 10 applications. We are starting to look at clustering and I wanted to know:
1. With CF 9 Standard, can we setup clustering? Our apps have session vars and we want to use sticky sessions but I'm unsure if we can do that just with CF9 Standard.
2. Does CF play well with VMware? If so, does anyone have any success stories around Virtualizing CF?
Thanks,

1. No, you can not set up clustering in CF Standard. You could set up multiple servers and let a load balancer handle the distributio of requests over the servers, but then you do not have session failover. This may meet your requirements. Or not.
2. It works just fine. I can't remember when I set up CF for the last time on a non VMware system.

Constantly getting "Reopen for Clustered Client Failover registered application has failed for FileObject " error in CCFilter eventlog.

Hi everybody.
Hope somebody will be able to help me with the following issue.
I have the following environment configuration:
1. WFC cluster (cluster1) contains 3 nodes - sql1,sql2,sql3
2. sql1 and sql2 can run single shared instance SQL server
3. Node sql3 is a standalone SQL server.
4. AlwaysON is turned on shared instance and standalone SQL servers and availability group have been configured for multiple DBs. So sql3 is a replica of shared instance.
5. All this runs on Vmware as a virtual machine.
I'm constantly getting following error in Microsoft-Windows-CCFFilter/Operational logfile when I execute SQL DB/Transaction log backup maintenance plan on my shared instance SQL server (sql1 or sql2):
Log Name:      Microsoft-Windows-CCFFilter/Operational
Source:        Microsoft-Windows-CCFFilter
Date:          10/24/2014 6:00:12 AM
Event ID:      2000
Task Category: None
Level:         Error
Keywords:
User:          DOMAIN\wfcsqlsvc
Computer:      SQL1
Description:
Reopen for Clustered Client Failover registered application has failed for FileObject 0xfffffa801cbb08a0 to \SQL3\Backups\Logs\DB1\DB1_backup_2014_10_24_060003_3960528.trn with status 0xC0000034
Getting multiple mentioned errors for every single DB I'm running my backup maintenance plan against. The maintenance plan gets executed on SQL1 which is shared instance machine.
Any ideas of what can cause this and how to fix it.
Thanks in advance.

Yes. I'm doing backup on primary replica in the AlwaysOn Availability Group. And this primary replica itself is a WFC shared SQL instance.
I've double checked Maintenance Plan's History and Agent's logs. No Error, no warning, nothing. And by the way DB full and transaction log backups gets created as they should. By that I mean that 'For availability databases, ignore Replica Priority for Backup
and Backup on Primary Settings' property is turned on and this allows me to do backups from primary replica.
As you've written I've clear the maintenance plan setting ''For availability databases, ignore Replica Priority for Backup and Backup on Primary Settings.', and configure the availability group's AUTOMATED_BACKUP_PREFERENCE setting to allow backup from any
replica for certain availability group. But still nothing. Getting the same error.
This is how AVG1 are configured regarding Backup preferences:
For example this subplan from Maintenance plan cause mentioned errors:

Apache and cluster and failover

          Hi All,
          I have a quick question. I am running 2 WLS 5.1 sp6 app servers
          in clustered mode (on solaris 7) using Apache 1.3.12 (also Solaris),
          and the weblogic proxy. Everything is working fine, and failover
          works correctly if one of the servers crashes.
          My problem is when the primary server for a session is correctly
          shut down. In my environment failover does not work in this situation.
          In the case that the server is shut down correctly, should failover
          occur? I would think that all sessions that are on the server
          being shut down would be transferred to the secondary server...
          is this a bug in weblogic? Or am I just wrong?
          Thanks again


          "Cameron Purdy" <[email protected]> wrote:
          >Some OS's combined with some WL releases will failover
          >on graceful
          >shut-down. Sometimes you just have to kill -9 or close
          >the port to get
          >failover to work.
          >
          >--That is very good information. Thank you. I do see the failover
          working correctly when I have 2 NT WLS app servers and a Solaris
          Apache web server. The problem occurs when I have 2 Solaris app
          servers and the Solaris Apache web server. does this sound familiar?
          >Cameron Purdy
          >Tangosol, Inc.
          >http://www.tangosol.com
          >+1.617.623.5782
          >WebLogic Consulting Available
          >
          >
          >"Nick Barbato" <[email protected]> wrote in message
          >news:[email protected]...
          >>
          >> Hi All,
          >>
          >> I have a quick question. I am running 2 WLS 5.1 sp6
          >app servers
          >> in clustered mode (on solaris 7) using Apache 1.3.12
          >(also Solaris),
          >> and the weblogic proxy. Everything is working fine,
          >and failover
          >> works correctly if one of the servers crashes.
          >>
          >> My problem is when the primary server for a session
          >is correctly
          >> shut down. In my environment failover does not work
          >in this situation.
          >> In the case that the server is shut down correctly,
          >should failover
          >> occur? I would think that all sessions that are on
          >the server
          >> being shut down would be transferred to the secondary
          >server...
          >> is this a bug in weblogic? Or am I just wrong?
          >>
          >> Thanks again
          >
          >

Difference between Clustering and Load balancing

          What is the difference between Clustering and Load balancing?
          For example, We use Cisco Arrowpoint to do load balancing and it works fine for 3
          Sun solaris boxes/WebLogic 6.1 SP1.
          So what is the value addition to buy clustering license?
          Thanks
          Selvaraj


Hi.
          Among other things, clustering allows you to share app data (such as http session
          data) across cluster members, allowing you to failover should one cluster member
          crash.
          If your app is stateless then this doesn't mean much - load balancing alone would
          probably be ok for you.
          Regards,
          Michael
          Selvaraji wrote:
          > What is the difference between Clustering and Load balancing?
          >
          > For example, We use Cisco Arrowpoint to do load balancing and it works fine for 3
          > Sun solaris boxes/WebLogic 6.1 SP1.
          >
          > So what is the value addition to buy clustering license?
          >
          > Thanks
          >
          > Selvaraj
          Michael Young
          Developer Relations Engineer
          BEA Support

MDB clustering and loadbalancing

          Hello Everything,
          I need your advise for clustering my MDB's. Below is the scenario.
          I deployed 4 MDB's on four weblogic servers and listening to the same JMS queue
          and created a cluster for those 4 weblogic servers for loadbalancing and failover.
          I set round-robin as the loadbalancing algorithm, but weblogic is not distributing
          the load based on that algorithm. First bean is receiving 4 messages before 2nd
          bean receives a message.
          I need to send 1st message to 1st server , 2nd message to 2nd server in that way.
          Can any advise better way of creating a cluster and loadbalancing the messages
          across the servers.
          Any help will be appreciated.
          Lucky


          "Lucky" <[email protected]> wrote:
          >
          >Hello Everything,
          >
          >I need your advise for clustering my MDB's. Below is the scenario.
          >
          >I deployed 4 MDB's on four weblogic servers and listening to the same
          >JMS queue
          >and created a cluster for those 4 weblogic servers for loadbalancing
          >and failover.
          >
          >I set round-robin as the loadbalancing algorithm, but weblogic is not
          >distributing
          >the load based on that algorithm. First bean is receiving 4 messages
          >before 2nd
          >bean receives a message.
          >
          >I need to send 1st message to 1st server , 2nd message to 2nd server
          >in that way.
          >Can any advise better way of creating a cluster and loadbalancing the
          >messages
          >across the servers.
          >
          >Any help will be appreciated.
          >
          >Lucky
          >
          >
          I think your jms queue should be jms distrubited queue and the connection factory
          which you use to create connection to the distributed queue should disable server
          affinity and enable load balance. also your MDB should be deployed to the cluster.

Clustering and SAP

Hi everybody,
I have this configuration:
SUN Solaris 2.6
SAP 4.5B
HA Sun Cluster 2.2
I want to run a brbackup on a instance that is under fault monitor of the HA Sun Cluster. I need to stop the FM without stop all the SAP R/3 instace. How I can do it? I know that is possible for FM on Oracle, NFS but on SAP I didn't find anything yet.
Someone can help me?
Thanx
Christian

Julias, or anyone
Could someone give me an indication or estimate of how the HA with MS clustering would look like with our existing landscape?
we have sndbox, dev, qas and prdn installed on Win2003 , SQL 2005, ECC 6.0. Our goal would be to have MS Clustering installed as a HA option for contingency and failover.
Are you then recommending that a new install of ECC 6.0 would be the most desired approach in order to achieve HA for our ECC Prodn server.
So what I would need is;
1 Server for ECC Prdn (prim. node)
1 Server for ECC Prdn failover (sec. node)
Do I need a third server for the heartbeat monitoring and failover (not sure of the correct terminology)
Also, both servers in the cluster would require most recent Support Stacks, and Kernel Patches.
AND it sounds like the install needs to be re-done for both servers? is this a correct assumption.
Will SQL 2008 run on Win 2003 and have HA MS clustering available to us as well on Win 2003?
maria

RE: Hard Failures, KeepAlive, and Failover --Follow-up

Hi,
It's a really challenging question. However, what do you want to do after
the network crash? Failover or just stop the service? Should we assume
that when the network is down, and so do your name service?
One idea is to use externalconnection to "listen" to your external non-forte
alarm, so do "whatever" after you receive the alarm instead of letting the
"logical connection" to time out or hang.
Regards,
Peter Sham.
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Lee [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 12:44 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Hard Failures, KeepAlive, and Failover -- Follow-up
I've gotten a handful of responses to my original post, and the suggested
solutions are all variations on the same theme -- periodically ping remote
nodes/partitions and then react when the node/partition goes down. In
other circumstance this would work, but unless I'm missing something this
solution doesn't solve the problem I'm running into.
Some background...
When a connection is set up between partitions on two different nodes,
Forte is effectively establishing two connections: a "physical
connection"
over TCP/IP between two ports and a "logical connection" between the two
partitions (running on top of the physical connection). Once a connection
is established between two partitions Forte assumes the logical connection
is valid until one of two things happen:
1) The logical connection is broken (by shutting down a partition from
Econsole/Escript, by killing a node manager, by terminating the ftexec,
etc.)
2) Forte detects that the physical connection is broken (via its KeepAlive
functionality).
If a physical connection is broken (via a cut cable or power-off
condition), and Forte has not yet detected the situation (via a KeepAlive
failure), the logical connection is still valid and Forte will still allow
method calls on the remote partition. In effect, Forte thinks the remote
partition is still up and running. In this situation, any method calls
made after the physical connection has been broken will simply hang. No
exceptions are generated and failover does not occur.
However, once a KeepAlive failure is detected all is made right.
Unfortunately, the lowest-bound latency of KeepAlive is greater than one
second, and we need to detect and react to hard failures in the 250-500ms
range. Using technology outside of Forte we are able to detect the hard
failures within the required times, but we haven't been able to get Forte
to react to this "outside" knowledge. Here's why:
Since Forte has not yet detected a KeepAlive failure, the logical
connection to the remote partition is still "valid". Although there are a
number of mechanisms that would allow a logical connection to be broken,
they all assume a valid physical connection -- which, of course, we don't
have!
It appears I'm in a "Catch-22" situation: In order to break a logical
connection between partitions, I need a valid physical connection. But
the
reason I'm trying to break the logical connection in the first place is
that I know (but Forte doesn't yet know) that the physical connection has
been broken.
If anyone knows a way around this Catch-22, please let me know.
Mike
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>-
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>

Make sure you chose the right format, and as far as partitioning in concerned, you have to select at least one partition, which will be the entire drive.

How to find out the primary and failover DNS name

Hi;
This sounds very stupid, but could some one please tell me how to find out the name/dns name of the primary and failover server without using the CDS console.
any help is appreciated

Is this what you want?
$ /usr/lib/ldap/ldap_cachemgr -g
cachemgr configuration:
server debug level 0
server log file "/var/ldap/cachemgr.log"
number of calls to ldapcachemgr 12729
cachemgr cache data statistics:
Configuration refresh information:
Previous refresh time: 2005/08/07 23:54:59
Next refresh time: 2005/08/08 00:55:00
Server information:
Previous refresh time: 2005/08/14 15:15:00
Next refresh time: 2005/08/15 03:15:00
server: ldap1.example.com, status: UP
server: ldap2.example.com, status: UP
server: ldap3.example.com, status: UP
Cache data information:
Maximum cache entries: 256
Number of cache entries: 0
Gary

Is Distributed Transaction Coordinator services of the application role are required by SQL Server 2012 for clustering and support of SharePoint 2013.

All I want to know is if Distributed Transaction Coordinator services of the application role are required by SQL Server 2012 for clustering and support of SharePoint 2013.
I have been planning and deploying my companies first Windows Server 2012/SQL Server 2012 Always On cluster and Always On Availability Groups Multi-Subnet cluster and instances for SharePoint 2013, and I will be brutally honest, the documentation on either
the MSDN and TechNet leave alot to be desired. Continually finding links in the documentation will take me from a Windows 2012 reference to a page talking about Windows Server 2008 or R2, The differences of which there are so many when it comes to configurations,
settings, roles, services when working with SQL Server 2012. I have been confused, frustrated, screaming mad, with all the misdirection in this documentation. The documentation takes me windows 2008 R2 which is different than 2012!
Tired and trying to pick myself up off the floor!
Greg
Gman

In general, DTC is not required for SQL 2012. But, since you are asking specifically about SharePoint, it would be better to ask in a SharePoint forum. They would be more likely to know those situations where FTC might be needed by SharePoint.
.:|:.:|:. tim

Array of clusters and in the cluster is a bar meter, how can I change the color individually?

Array of clusters and in the cluster is a bar meter, how can I change the color of the bar meter individually for each element of the array? I have just figured out that you can't change properties of one element of the array without all elements changing. For the scaling I had to make numeric indicators for each tick of the scale so that each bar meter in the clustered array would have individual scales. I also had to do some math to scale each barmeter to display correct proportions from 0 to 100%. Now I'm stumped on the color of the bar meter. Basically, if the value goes over a setpoint, the bar meter needs to turn red. It has to be in an array to be infinitely scalable.
Thanks
Matt
Solved!
Go to Solution.

You can't do that-
without a little trick.
You could consider laying a custom color box over the bar graph in the cluster you can set the color based on the value of the bar graph or even make a "Pseudo"- bar graph using a series of color boxes stacked to look lie a bar and changing values of the Color boxs from empty to full to red.
Here is an example to demonstrate
Jeff
Attachments:
Pseudo bar.vi ‏12 KB

Load balancing and Failover

Hello,
We are wondering how load-balancing and failover of tpcall() work with
WTC:
The scenario:
We have one WLS Domain and two Tuxedo Domains. The Tuxedo Domains offer
the same set of services.
In the bdmconfig.xml, we specify connection_policy as 'ON_STARTUP' for
both Remote Tuxedo Domains. We also Import (T_DM_IMPORT) the same
Tuxedo Service from both Tuxedo Domains.
Questions:
1. Is there any load-balancing of the tpcall between the two Domains? If
so, is it round-robin? If round-robin, what determines the order?
2. If it is ONLY Failover, what determines the order of the tpcall? And,
is the Failover automatic? Or do we need to code for retry on failure?
3. ON_DEMAND vs ON_STARTUP: Does ON_DEMAND drop the connection to the
remote domain upon tpterm? And does ON_STARTUP use a pool of
TuxedoConnection objects?
4. Are there any configuration parameters for
'max_number-of_connections? What determines how many simultaneous
connections can be made?
Thanks,
Suresh Mohan.

Hi Suresh,
The following are my answers to your questions.
Suresh Mohan wrote:
Hello,
We are wondering how load-balancing and failover of tpcall() work with
WTC:
The scenario:
We have one WLS Domain and two Tuxedo Domains. The Tuxedo Domains offer
the same set of services.
In the bdmconfig.xml, we specify connection_policy as 'ON_STARTUP' for
both Remote Tuxedo Domains. We also Import (T_DM_IMPORT) the same
Tuxedo Service from both Tuxedo Domains.
Questions:
1. Is there any load-balancing of the tpcall between the two Domains? If
so, is it round-robin? If round-robin, what determines the order?Yes there is a load balancing between two remote Tuxedo TDomain Gateways.
The algorithm is random, not RR. Over time this should give equal
opportunities to both remote TDomain.
>
2. If it is ONLY Failover, what determines the order of the tpcall? And,
is the Failover automatic? Or do we need to code for retry on failure?The load balancing is always there. The failover is automatic. When a
connection to a remote TDomain encountered a problem (ie network) the remote
domain will be put on retry open connection (in ON_STARTUP) and the load
balancing will not select it until the connection re-established.
However, the tpcall() that encountered the error will not be retried to send
to different destination. It is up to the application to decide whether it
want to resend. Any requests called after the error will not select the
failed Remote TDomain.
>
3. ON_DEMAND vs ON_STARTUP: Does ON_DEMAND drop the connection to the
remote domain upon tpterm? And does ON_STARTUP use a pool of
TuxedoConnection objects?TPTERM() only terminate your application session to WTC. WTC still maintain
a secured T-session to remote Tuxedo TDomain. WTC does not use a pool of
TuxedoConnection Objects, the object stored in the JNDI refers to WTC.
>
4. Are there any configuration parameters for
'max_number-of_connections? What determines how many simultaneous
connections can be made?No. As described in #3, there is no need to use connection pool in WTC. WTC
uses session and virtual circuit design concept as Tuxedo TDOMAIN, the
logical pool is created/destroyed dynamically. That is the reason why you
can have a lot of TPACALL() outstanding at the same time. (The limitation is
the availability system resource.)
>
>
Thanks,
Suresh Mohan.Regards,
Hong-Hsi :-)

Load Balancing and Failover with 10G Standard Edition

Hi,
I am new to Oracle Replication and need some help setting up replication for load balancing and failover. Is this possible using Oracle 10G Standard Edition? I plan on having all updates done on the master site and both databases will be for reads. In case of failure of the master site, I would need to be able to failover to the other database.
Also, if anyone knows of any documention for Basic Replication in 10G, please let me know.
Thanks.

Simple nnapshot replication of data would require significant manual effort to configure to load balance or failover. One the load balancing side, you would generally be limited to to static load balancing-- assigning half the users to one machine and the other half of the users to the other machine, regardless of who is actively using the machine. Failover would be a significant manual effort, particularly to bring the failed machine back into the cluster. You would be implementing the guts of multi-master replication.
Frankly, if you actually have a system which is valuable enough to need load balancing and disaster recovery, I'm going to wager that it will be far cheaper even in the short run to buy more boxes and/or enterprise edition licenses than to try to implement this sort of thing yourself. In the long run, it will be far cheaper, since it will be far easier to maintain. Building all this yourself would probably be penny wise and pound foolish.
Justin
Distributed Database Consulting, Inc.
http://www.ddbcinc.com/askDDBC

Load balancing and failover in Embedded LDAP in weblogic

How to handle load balancing and failover in Embedded LDAP in weblogic server?

You should consider posting this to the Weblogic and/or LDAP support forums. This forum is meant for Sun Web Server questions.
Thanks
Manish

Clustering and failover

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for