ESXi 4.1 NIC Teaming's Load-Balancing Algorithm,Nexus 7000 and UCS

Hi, Cisco Gurus:
Please help me in answering the following questions (UCSM 1.4(xx), 2 UCS 6140XP, 2 Nexus 7000, M81KR in B200-M2, No Nexus 1000V, using VMware Distributed Switch:
Q1. For me to configure vPC on a pair of Nexus 7000, do I have to connect Ethernet Uplink from each Cisco Fabric Interconnect to the 2 Nexus 7000 in a bow-tie fashion? If I connect, say 2 10G ports from Fabric Interconnect 1 to 1 Nexus 7000 and similar connection from FInterconnect 2 to the other Nexus 7000, in this case can I still configure vPC or is it a validated design? If it is, what is the pro and con versus having 2 connections from each FInterconnect to 2 separate Nexus 7000?
Q2. If vPC is to be configured in Nexus 7000, is it COMPULSORY to configure Port Channel for the 2 Fabric Interconnects using UCSM? I believe it is not. But what is the pro and con of HAVING NO Port Channel within UCS versus HAVING Port Channel when vPC is concerned?
Q3. if vPC is to be configured in Nexus 7000, I understand there is a limitation on confining to ONLY 1 vSphere NIC Teaming's Load-Balancing Algorithm i.e. Route Based on IP Hash. Is it correct?
Again, what is the pro and con here with regard to application behaviours when Layer 2 or 3 is concerned? Or what is the BEST PRACTICES?
I would really appreciate if someone can help me clear these lingering doubts of mine.
God Bless.
SiM

Sim,
Here are my thoughts without a 1000v in place,
Q1. For me to configure vPC on a pair of Nexus 7000, do I have to connect Ethernet Uplink from each Cisco Fabric Interconnect to the 2 Nexus 7000 in a bow-tie fashion? If I connect, say 2 10G ports from Fabric Interconnect 1 to 1 Nexus 7000 and similar connection from FInterconnect 2 to the other Nexus 7000, in this case can I still configure vPC or is it a validated design? If it is, what is the pro and con versus having 2 connections from each FInterconnect to 2 separate Nexus 7000? //Yes, for vPC to UCS the best practice is to bowtie uplink to (2) 7K or 5Ks.
Q2. If vPC is to be configured in Nexus 7000, is it COMPULSORY to configure Port Channel for the 2 Fabric Interconnects using UCSM? I believe it is not. But what is the pro and con of HAVING NO Port Channel within UCS versus HAVING Port Channel when vPC is concerned? //The port channel will be configured on both the UCSM and the 7K. The pro of a port channel would be both bandwidth and redundancy. vPC would be prefered.
Q3. if vPC is to be configured in Nexus 7000, I understand there is a limitation on confining to ONLY 1 vSphere NIC Teaming's Load-Balancing Algorithm i.e. Route Based on IP Hash. Is it correct? //Without the 1000v, I always tend to leave to dvSwitch load balence behavior at the default of "route by portID".
Again, what is the pro and con here with regard to application behaviours when Layer 2 or 3 is concerned? Or what is the BEST PRACTICES? UCS can perform L2 but Northbound should be performing L3.
Cheers,
David Jarzynka

Similar Messages

Hyper-V NIC Team Load Balancing Algorithm: TranportPorts vs Hyper-VPorts

Hi,
I'm going to need to configure a NIC team for the LAN traffic for a Hyper-V 2012 R2 environment. What is the recommended load balancing algorithm?
Some background:
- The NIC team will deal with LAN traffic (NOT iSCSI storage traffic)
- I'll set up a converged network. So there'll be a virtual switch on top of this team, which will have vNICs configured for each cluster, live migration and management
- I'll implement QOS at the virtual switch level (using option -DefaultFlowMinimumBandwidthWeight) and at the vNIC level (using option -MinimumBandwidthWeight)
- The CSV is set up on an Equallogics cluster. I know that this team is for the LAN so it has nothing to do with the SAN, but this reference will become clear in the next paragraph.
Here's where it gets a little confusing. I've checked some of the Equallogics documentation to ensure this environment complies with their requirements as far as storage networking is concerned. However, as part of their presentation the Dell publication
TR1098-4, recommends creating the LAN NIC team with the TrasportPorts Load Balancing Algorithm. However, in some of the Microsoft resources (i.e. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn550728.aspx), the recommended load balancing algorithm is HyperVPorts.
Just to add to the confusion, in this Microsoft TechEd presentation, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ed7HThAvp7o, the recommendation (at around minute 8:06) is to use dynamic ports algorithm mode. So obviously there are many ways to do this, but which one is
correct? I spoke with Equallogics support and the rep said that their documentation recommends TransportPorts LB algorithm because that's what they've tested and works. I'm wondering what the response from a Hyper-V expert would be to this question. Anyway,
any input on this last point would be appreciated.

Gleb,
>>See Windows Server 2012 R2 NIC Teaming (LBFO) Deployment and Management for more
info
Thanks for this reference. It seems that I have an older version of this document where there's absolutely
no mention of the dynamic LBA. Hence my confusion when in the Microsoft TechEd presentation the
recommendation was to use Dynamic. I almost implemented this environment with switch dependent and Address Hash Distribution because, based on the older version of the document, this combination offered:
a) Native teaming for maximum performance and switch diversity is not required; or
b) Teaming under the Hyper-V switch when an individual VM needs to be able to transmit at rates in excess of what one team member can deliver
The new version of the document recommends Dynamic over the other two LBA. The analogy that the document
makes of TCP flows with human speech was really helpful for me to understand what this algorithm is doing. For those who will never read the document, I'm referring to this:
"The outbound loads in this mode are dynamically balanced based on the concept of
flowlets. Just as human speech has natural breaks at the ends of words and sentences, TCP flows (TCP communication streams) also have naturally
occurring breaks. The portion of a TCP flow between two such breaks is referred to as a flowlet. When the dynamic mode algorithm detects that a flowlet boundary has been encountered, i.e., a break of sufficient length has occurred in the TCP flow,
the algorithm will opportunistically rebalance the flow to another team member if apropriate. The algorithm may also periodically rebalance flows that do not contain any flowlets if circumstances require it. As a result the affinity
between TCP flow and team member can change at any time as the dynamic balancing algorithm works to balance the workload of the team members. "
Anyway, this post made my week. You sir are deserving of a beer!

SG300-28: LAG Load Balance Algorithm

The SG300-28 LAG Load Balance Algorithm options are:
MAC Address
IP/MAC Address
This switch is connected to two ESXi hosts running version 5.5 each with quad port 1 gbit nic.
These ESXI hosts supports > 20 algorithms.
Is there in a upcoming firmware for the SG300-28 supporting more algorithms?

The SG300-28 LAG Load Balance Algorithm options are:
MAC Address
IP/MAC Address
This switch is connected to two ESXi hosts running version 5.5 each with quad port 1 gbit nic.
These ESXI hosts supports > 20 algorithms.
Is there in a upcoming firmware for the SG300-28 supporting more algorithms?

ACE Load Balancing algorithm

Team,
I was reading Designing Content Switching Solutions last night. I came across a page that suggested Round Robin for HTTP connections, Least Conns for FTP connections, dst Hash for caching connections and so on.
Could someone please provide information or a link on which load balancing algorithm to use based on the application, is there some form of best practice for this?
Thank you,
John...

John,
there is no best practices.
It depends on your applications and needs.
For example, for caching, some people prefer to optimize the disk space, and other the response time.
So, if you do destination hash, you guarantee that all traffic for one site is always handled by the same cache.
Therefore you optimize the disk space since you will not find the same object on all caches.
BUT if one site attracts a lot of connections, the cache device that handles that site will be overloaded (for example youtube.com)
Leastconn is a good option in theory.
The device that has less connections should receive the next one.
The problem is if you have flapping links or servers crashing or if you do a lot of maintenance and add/remove servers frequently.
This confuses the algorithm and is the source of a lot of bugs.
My recommendation is to go with roundrobin unless you have identify that you really need another algorithm.
And you can always start with roundrobin and see what happens...
Gilles.

Load balancing algorithm for groups in RZ12

Hello,
I would like to know the load balancing algorithm for groups defined in RZ12.
I know that log on groups for external connections are administered via SMLG and table RZLLICLASS.
I also know that RFC resources can be managed for RFC logon groups via RZ12.
Kind regards,
Peter
<removed_by_moderator>
Point awarding is at your discretion, but read and follow the "Rules of Engagement"
Edited by: Juan Reyes on Dec 3, 2010 10:21 AM

Hello!
Found this post while searching information about RFC and Logon Groups...
I have some mess in my head with SMLG functionality and RZ12. As I know SMLG we can use to distribute users to application server instances, it gives us good achievement in performance. With RZ12 we can distribute RFC connection of particular job for parallel execution on predefined application server. With SMQS and SMQR transaction we can set "Name of AS Group" to route RFC-execution on certain server or servers. But I have troubles with understanding. Imagine, we set up group 1 with 2 servers (name it RFC_GR1), and group 2 with another 2 servers (name it RFC_GR2). How could qRFC scheduler decide on which RFC server group (RFC_GR1 or RFC_GR2) distribute RFC-execution? How to interact "Name of AS Group" with RFC groups if we can set only one group? How could we distribute RFC-execution depending on our logon groups (smlg)? We would like to distribute RFC depending on SAP logon groups. Is it possible? Or do I compare apple and orange?
Regards,
Artem Ivashkin

Port Channel Load-Balancing Algorithm (North Bound)

I'm trying to figure out what the load balancing algorithm for the 6100 and 6200 FIs for the Northbound connections. I can't find any documentation on how to change it.
The Nexus 7000s use an 8-bit hash, making it very easy to do something other than 2, 4, or 8 link port channel and get even (at least algorithmically) distribution.
Catalyst switches (not sure about Sup2T though) would use a 1, 2, or 3-bit index, which would skew traffic algorthmically if you used a non-power of 2.
Looking at the 5K documentation, it seems to use the Catalyst style (though haven't been able to confirm). My guess is that whatever is used for the 5Ks is used for the 6100/6200.
Design wise, this would mean you would want to use powers of 2 for your NB uplinks.

Hello Tony,
On UCS FI, it uses " sr-cdest-ip " as the load balancing algorithm and uses 8 parameters for hashing
6248-01-B(nxos)# sh port-channel load-balance
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:
System: source-dest-ip
Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: source-dest-mac
IP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
6248-01-B(nxos)# show platform fwm info pc port-channel 1
dump pc info: if_index 369098752 dump_all 0 verbose 1
Po1: state 0x0 #pifs 1 fwimpd ctx 0x9666c1c
Po1: hash params - l2_da 1 l2_sa 1 l3_da 1 l3_sa 1
Po1: hash params - l4_da 1 l4_sa 1 xor_sa_da 1 hash_elect 1
I could not find an option to change these values.
Padma

Load balancing algorithms

hello
can any one give URL about load balancing algorithms in 11500 series?
sincerally

Hi,
Here is a link.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/css_730/contlbgd/contrule.htm#1038118
Hope this helps,
Regards,
Sagar

Load balancing weirdness using NAT and same-metric route

Hi.
I'm trying to set up a double-WAN load-balancing scenario:
I decided to attempt the "multiple same-metric routes with NAT" approach so I went for the example used in the IOS NAT Load-Balancing for Two ISP Connections Configuration Guide [1].
I decided to use an upside-down Cisco 871-SEC/K9: use Vlan1 and Vlan2 for the routers and Fa4 for the LAN. I am hoping this is not an issue.
There is this weirdness with some connections, particularly FTP. I pinpointed the problem to the following scenario: if I do a couple of pings to 100.1.1.1 using the FastEthernet4 as the source address, this is what I get in the logs:
=== PING 1 ECHO REQUEST ===
*Mar 3 04:38:43.521: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), routed via RIB
*Mar 3 04:38:43.521: NAT: s=192.168.60.4->10.129.124.2, d=100.1.1.1 [14152]
*Mar 3 04:38:43.521: IP: s=10.129.124.2 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), g=10.129.124.1, len 60, forward
*Mar 3 04:38:43.521: ICMP type=8, code=0
=== PING 1 ECHO REPLY ===
*Mar 3 04:38:45.589: NAT*: s=100.1.1.1, d=10.129.124.2->192.168.60.4 [19824]
*Mar 3 04:38:45.589: IP: tableid=0, s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), routed via RIB
*Mar 3 04:38:45.589: IP: s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), g=192.168.60.4, len 60, forward
*Mar 3 04:38:45.589: ICMP type=0, code=0
=== (something else) ===
*Mar 3 04:38:52.353: RT: SET_LAST_RDB for 0.0.0.0/0
OLD rdb: via 10.129.124.33, Vlan2
NEW rdb: via 10.129.124.1, Vlan1
=== PING 2 ECHO REQUEST ===
*Mar 3 04:38:52.353: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan2), routed via RIB
*Mar 3 04:38:52.353: NAT: s=192.168.60.4->10.129.124.2, d=100.1.1.1 [14159]
*Mar 3 04:38:52.353: IP: s=10.129.124.2 (FastEthernet4), d=100.1.1.1 (Vlan2), g=10.129.124.33, len 60, forward
*Mar 3 04:38:52.353: ICMP type=8, code=0
=== PING 2 ECHO REPLY ===
*Mar 3 04:38:53.029: NAT*: s=100.1.1.1, d=10.129.124.2->192.168.60.4 [19825]
*Mar 3 04:38:53.029: IP: tableid=0, s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), routed via RIB
*Mar 3 04:38:53.033: IP: s=100.1.1.1 (Vlan1), d=192.168.60.4 (FastEthernet4), g=192.168.60.4, len 60, forward
*Mar 3 04:38:53.033: ICMP type=0, code=0
In the section "Ping 2 Echo Request" line 2 shows the NAT translating the packet to the address for the first provider but line 3 shows it routing it through the second one.
In this case, the ICMP packet goes through but it is problematic if the ISP restricts the service by source-address (like RPF) or there is some acceleration mechanism inside the provider cloud, other than just plain routing.
What am I missing? Here is the relevant part of the configuration. I deliberately disabled CEF to be able to debug the messages, but I *think* this may be altering the actual router behavior. This router does not have a "debug ip cef packet" command.
no ip cef
ip dhcp pool lan-side
import all
network 192.168.60.0 255.255.255.0
default-router 192.168.60.1
domain-name doublewan.local
dns-server 8.8.8.8 8.8.4.4
lease infinite
ip domain name doublewan
interface FastEthernet0
!doesn't appear on running-config: vlan 1 is the default access vlan
!switchport access vlan 1
interface FastEthernet1
switchport access vlan 2
interface FastEthernet2
shutdown
interface FastEthernet3
shutdown
interface FastEthernet4
ip address 192.168.60.1 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside
ip virtual-reassembly
no ip route-cache
duplex auto
speed auto
interface Vlan1
ip address 10.129.124.2 255.255.255.224
ip nat outside
ip virtual-reassembly
no ip route-cache
interface Vlan2
ip address 10.129.124.35 255.255.255.224
ip nat outside
ip virtual-reassembly
no ip route-cache
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Vlan1 10.129.124.1
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Vlan2 10.129.124.33
ip nat inside source route-map nat1 interface Vlan1 overload
ip nat inside source route-map nat2 interface Vlan2 overload
ip access-list standard acl4-nexthop-vlan1
permit 10.129.124.1
ip access-list standard acl4-nexthop-vlan2
permit 10.129.124.33
route-map nat2 permit 10
match ip address 102
match ip next-hop acl4-nexthop-vlan2
match interface Vlan2
route-map nat1 permit 10
match ip address 101
match ip next-hop acl4-nexthop-vlan1
match interface Vlan1
control-plane
Of course, there is some configuration pending for redundancy and stuff.
Thanks a lot in advance.
[1] http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/network-address-translation-nat/100658-ios-nat-load-balancing-2isp.html

Hello.
This might be a bug in debug command or the IOS (without ip cef) you use; as routing is done before NAT (inside to outside).
To make sure it works fine with ip cef, just enable strict uRPF (or just ACL) on .1 and .33 interfaces and see if you see any packet sent over wrong interface.
PS: please check "sh ip cef 100.1.1.1"; I guess ip cef would tell you "per-destination sharing".

Load-balancing issues with iPlanet and multiple clusters

We're in performance test of a large-scale clustered deployment based on WLS 5.1sp10.
Due to scalability/functionality issues, some of which we've seen firsthand and
some of which we've been informed of by associates as well as BEA representatives,
we've chosen to implement multiple clusters with a maximum of three nodes each.
These clusters will be fronted by a web server tier consisting of iPlanet servers
using the proxy plugin.
Due to hardware constraints (both in test and in production), however, we've configured
the iPlanet servers to route across the multiple clusters. In our test environment,
for instance, we've got a single iPlanet server routing across two 3-node clusters,
and the configuration in obj.conf is as follows:
<Object name="application" ppath="*/application">
Service fn="wl-proxy" \
WebLogicCluster="clusterA_1:9990,clusterB_1:9991,clusterA_2:9990,clusterB_2:9991,clusterA_3:9990,
clusterB_3:9991" \
CookieName="ApplicationSession"
</Object>
Our issue is that the load-balancing doesn't appear to work across the clusters.
We're seeing one cluster get about 90% of the load, while the other receives
only 10%.
So, the question (finally!) is: Is this configuration correct (i.e., will it
work according to the logic of the proxy plugin), and is it appropriate for this
situation? Are there other alternative approaches that anyone can recommend?
Thanks in advance,
cramer

I use weblogic6.1 with sp2+windows 2000.I develop a web application and deploy
it to cluster.Through HttpClusterServlets proxy of weblogic I found that a server
in cluster almost get 95% of requests but another only get 5% of requests.Why???
I don't set any special parameter.And the weight of the two clustered server is
equal.I use round-robin arithmetic.
Thanks!
"cramer" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
We're in performance test of a large-scale clustered deployment based
on WLS 5.1sp10.
Due to scalability/functionality issues, some of which we've seen firsthand
and
some of which we've been informed of by associates as well as BEA representatives,
we've chosen to implement multiple clusters with a maximum of three nodes
each.
These clusters will be fronted by a web server tier consisting of iPlanet
servers
using the proxy plugin.
Due to hardware constraints (both in test and in production), however,
we've configured
the iPlanet servers to route across the multiple clusters. In our test
environment,
for instance, we've got a single iPlanet server routing across two 3-node
clusters,
and the configuration in obj.conf is as follows:
<Object name="application" ppath="*/application">
Service fn="wl-proxy" \
WebLogicCluster="clusterA_1:9990,clusterB_1:9991,clusterA_2:9990,clusterB_2:9991,clusterA_3:9990,
clusterB_3:9991" \
CookieName="ApplicationSession"
</Object>
Our issue is that the load-balancing doesn't appear to work across the
clusters.
We're seeing one cluster get about 90% of the load, while the other
receives
only 10%.
So, the question (finally!) is: Is this configuration correct (i.e.,
will it
work according to the logic of the proxy plugin), and is it appropriate
for this
situation? Are there other alternative approaches that anyone can recommend?
Thanks in advance,
cramer

Mod_weblogic and load balancing algorithm

Hi,
we have a problem where we have 2 boxes, each with Apache (doing some header and url rewrites) and configured with mod_weblogic, and weblogic servers with our stateless applications.
We have a HW loadbalancer in front, doing round-robin balancing, and we would like to configure load balancing feature in the Apaches so that each Apache always tries the request to the weblogic located in the same box, and only if that fails, try to the weblogic in the other box.
We also have a web applications with sessions, so we would like balancing feature for sticky sessions to apply.
Can somebody help?

The loadbalancing section in this post (http://middlewaremagic.com/weblogic/?p=7819) might help you
You can configure the weblogic module by using, for example,
LoadModule weblogic_module   "${ORACLE_HOME}/ohs/modules/mod_wl_ohs.so"
<IfModule weblogic_module>
     ConnectTimeoutSecs 10
     ConnectRetrySecs 2
     DebugConfigInfo ON
     WLSocketTimeoutSecs 2
     WLIOTimeoutSecs 300
     Idempotent ON
     FileCaching ON
     KeepAliveSecs 20
     KeepAliveEnabled ON
     DynamicServerList ON
     WLProxySSL OFF
</IfModule>
<Location /b2bconsole>
     SetHandler weblogic-handler
     WebLogicCluster 192.168.1.66:8001,192.168.1.67:9001
</Location>
<Location /integration>
     SetHandler weblogic-handler
     WebLogicCluster 192.168.1.66:8001,192.168.1.67:9001
</Location>
<Location /soa-infra>
     SetHandler weblogic-handler
     WebLogicCluster 192.168.1.66:8001,192.168.1.67:9001
</Location>

What is load balancer in fms cluster and how to configure it and testing fms clustering

Hey guys,
I am new to fms and clustering the fms server in origin-edge mode.But i am confused actually what is load balancer and how to configure it .
After configuring , how to test and confirm that fms clustering is working.Is there any one can help me, plz....................
thanks in Advance........

Flash Media Server does not come bundled with a load balancer. In theory, one deploys FMS in an edge/origin configuration like this
1 Origin ----> N Edges ------> Customer Traffic
The idea here is that N edges shoulder the load for most customers with a single origin coordinating resources like VOD content or script access. The issue that remains is "how do I spread customers over the N edges" and that's where load balancing comes in. Most customers use a prepackaged load balancing solution - as an Adobe staffer I can't recommend any of them over the other, but you should be able to get some recommendations here along with just googling for it. The short answer contained here though is, you're going to have to find one outside of FMS if that's needed for your setup.
Asa

Network Load balancing for Server 2003 and Server 2012

Our environment currently has 2 web servers running Windows Server 2003 with Network Load Balancing. We are looking to update the servers to Windows Server 2012. Is it possible to add Windows Server 2012 into the Windows Server 2003 Network Load
balancing cluster? This way we could bring up 2 new servers add them into the network load balancing and then take out the 2003 servers without disrupting our production.
Any thoughts or suggestions on how to make this work properly?

Hi,
You can upgrade an existing Network Load Balancing (NLB) cluster to Windows Server 2008, Windows Server 2008 R2, or Windows Server 2012 by taking the entire cluster offline
and upgrading all the hosts, or you can leave the NLB cluster online and perform a rolling upgrade. A rolling upgrade entails taking individual cluster hosts offline one at a time, upgrading each host, and returning the host to the cluster. You continue upgrading
individual cluster hosts until the entire cluster is upgraded. A rolling upgrade allows the cluster to continue running during the upgrade.
The related KB:
Upgrading an Existing Network Load Balancing Cluster
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731691(v=ws.10).aspx
Hope this helps.
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

Load Balancing with ASR9000 vN and multiple ISPs

Hi,
we will deploy a new DC as Active/Active.
We will have ISPA and ISP B in each DC. Internet users are anybody in the internet coming to our e-commerce DC application.
How could we do load balancing between ISPs using the ASR9001 and nV feature ?
There is any IOS-XR feature that could help us about to do load balancing between ISPs?
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
J

You have 2 options here Jordi, either you can use BGP loadbalancing, this requires multipath as BGP by default would only install one route from the BGP table to the RIB hence FIB.
But this may result in excessive IRL (inter rack link) usage in the cluster when traffic coming in on rack0 wants to take the bGP path out on rack1
You could also use ABF (access-list based forwarding) to forcelly push traffic received on rack0 out on the link on rack0 and use an ipsla tracker to fallback to rack1 in case the uplink is gone.
Alternatively to extend this by IGP signaling to redirect traffic preferably to rack1 to start with to minimize the IRL usage.
And then you also have the ability to use RPL in the uplink path to make one link more preferred on teh internet then the other in case you want to control a bit which link is preferably used on rack0 or rack1
regards
xander

Load balancing between application server and database

Hi,
is there any load balancing between the application server and the database? Consider we have a single instance of an application server that sends database queries from different clients to the database. Are the requests queued in some way at the application server, allowing to control the flow of the queries (e.g. queries from "more important" clients might be sent with a higher priority)?
Thanks for your help!

Hi Victor/Jim/Volker,
Thanks a lot for all the responses..
Just wanted to let you guys know that my installation finished successfully.
The thing which confused me was that my Qtime, Qdate and everything else was showing correct values..
Well, my problem I set the environmental variable PASE_TZ to the EST time zone on a SYS level using WRKENVVAR>F4>SYS and added the variable. I logged off and the sidofr logged off, but one user which should have logged off and didn't was the "SAPINST"(my installation user) which was logged in the subsystem TMKSVR00.
Even when I had closed the SAPINST installlation program, the user doesn't log off...it just sits there until and unless u shut him out of the system using the option 4 on wrkactjob for ending the JOB(SAPINST logged in the system below the TMKSVR00 subsystem)
So since the SAPISNT user never logged of, his environmental variables were not initilized properly, even after the changes...
This thought came to me almost after a 6 hours of wasting my time searching for notes here and there...
I think when u end/stop the install in SAPINST, the SAPINST user should log off the AS400 system, but I have noticed, it never does...although when u restart the installation, if u have noticed it shows you the log on for the SAPINST user in the TMKSVR screen...
Its kind of buggy, I would say...
I have noticed, that even when I log on to AS400 from home or from a remote PC using Emulator, it shows me logged in the subsystem and even after i have logged of, it still shows me there...
Anyway, thanks a lot guys...for all your responses..
Just wanted to let you know all.
Thanks
Abhi

Load balancing SMA web service and SMA end point URL

Hi,
We have set up the recommended 3 servers with Azure Pack, SMA Web Service and Runbook Worker. We are now wanting to configure the Azure pack portal to setup the SMA endpoint url for the web service. Before we do that, we are assuming we should
load balance the web services to answer on 1 url (ie, smaws.domainname.com).
1. Is there any guidance or things to consider when load balancing the 3 web services to answer to 1 url. We will probably use f5 since that is what we use.
2. The end point url that we configure for Azure Pack automation should be this load balanced URL correct?
3. Should we have the Azure pack installed on just one of the servers or all 3. We did all 3 but it seems like server2 and 3 just redirect to 1 anyway so I am assuming the URL for Azure pack is stored in a db somewhere.
4. Are there any other components of SMA/Azure Pack that should also be load balanced?
Thanks
Thanks Lance

So in this case you need to register the SMA Runbook Workers (do this on machine 1):
$webService
= "https://localhost"
$workers
= (Get-SmaRunbookWorkerDeployment
-WebServiceEndpoint
$webService).ComputerName
if($workers
-isnot [system.array]) {$workers
= @($workers)}
$workers
+= "MachineName2"
$workers += "MachineName3"
New-SmaRunbookWorkerDeployment
-WebServiceEndpoint
$webService -ComputerName
$workers

ESXi 4.1 NIC Teaming's Load-Balancing Algorithm,Nexus 7000 and UCS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for