Load balancing among multiple CPU

I am using a java based application on windows server 2008 r2 64bit and JRE 6u17.The server has multiple processor.But when we run the application only one cpu takes the 100% load and cant balance the load.But if we run the application on windows xp or server 2003 the application can balance the among the CPU.
Any one noticed this type of issue before or any one know the reason???
Thanks

Your application probably has one thread that is CPU-intensive.
If that's the case, the "balanced" CPU utilization you see on Windows is caused by unnecessary context switches. And thus your app runs slower than it otherwise would.
If your app is spinning like crazy in a single CPU, does it really matter which one it's spinning in?

Similar Messages

Load balancing across multiple machines

I am looking for assistance in configuring Tuxedo to perform load balancing across
multiple machines. I have successfully performed load balancing for a service
across different servers hosted on one machine but not to another server that's
hosted on a different machine.
Any assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Hello, Christina.
Load balancing with multiple machines is a little bit different than
in the same machine. One of the important resource in this kind
of application is network bandwidth, so tuxedo tries to keep the
traffic among the machines as low as possible. So, it only
balance the load (call services in other machine) in case all the
services are busy in the machine where they are call.
I mean, if you have workstation clients attached only to one
machine, then tuxedo will call services in this machine untill
all servers are busy.
If you want load balancing, try to put one WSL in each machine,
and the corresponding configuration in your WSC ( with the | to
make tuxedo randomly choose one or the other) or spread your
native clients among all the machines.
And so, be carefull with the routing!
Ramón Gordillo
"Christina" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
I am looking for assistance in configuring Tuxedo to perform load balancing
across
multiple machines. I have successfully performed load balancing for a
service
across different servers hosted on one machine but not to another server
that's
hosted on a different machine.
Any assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated.

Load balancing over multiple E3s

Hi all,
For the same VP , can I make load balancing over multiple E3s connected bet the BPX 8600 and MGX 8850.
Asking the question in another way:
Is there a possibility for load balancing over multiple LSPs (multiple E3 interfaces) in Cell-Mode MPLS...and if possible,plz provide me with any good links for configuration.

Following link might be useful to you
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wanbu/bpx8600/9_2/ref92/bpxrtag.htm

SA520 load balancing for multiple IPSec connections

Hello,
I just would like to ask whether the following is possible or what other people think might be the best way to go.
Let me describe the current setup:
Our company has a main office which is connected to the internet through an SA520W appliance, and two satellite offices which have other IPSec routers installed. The SA520W is currently only connected through the main WAN interface to a DSL line (DSL 16000). The tunnels are established and it all works quite well.
However, we have experienced lags and slow connections when someone transfers a larger file from the main office to the outside (either satellite office or, say, some FTP server on the internet). This is of course due to the limited upload capacity of the DSL line. Therefore, I am thinking about getting another DSL line for use as the optional WAN port of the SA520W.
My question is: Is it possible to establish two IPSec tunnels from a satellite office to the main office, one to the main WAN port and one to the optional WAN port of the SA520W? The two main hurdles I see with that is that a) the SA520W can only bind IPSec to one port and b) the network mask of each IPSec phase 2 needs to identify the subnet uniquely. Am I correct with the assumption that this cannot be done?
If so, the only way I can see right now is to bind all IPsec traffic to the optional port and have at least main office <-> internet traffic separated from all IPSec traffic. Or has anyone a better solution to this?
Thanks in advance,
Roland

I honestly don't recall any issues with the load balancing. I've personally never seen an issue, opened a case for one or observed a problem in my lab using multiple T1 lines...
That's not to say there could be a problem. But as far as I know this aspect of the router is solid.
The only thing I strongly dislike about most modern DSL deployments, the ISP like to give out "residential" or "business" gateways. These things just make life terrible since it is a router/nat device.
-Tom
Please rate helpful posts

7.10 installation server, load balancing and multiple installation servers

Hi
In the 7.10 GUI installation server, there is no Load balancing option anamore, also there seems to be no option to easily clone the installation server from within the nwsapsetupadmin.exe program.
If having MANY users at one location, and needing more than one installation server to accomodate the frontend installations, do you need to do this "manually" now ? grouping users and and the logon script directing different user groups to different sapgui installation servers ?
what about creating multiple installation servers easily, is it possible to simply copy the installation server directory (c:\sapinst f.ex.) to another file server, share the directory and configure the DS and IS services (if needed) ??
will configured packages and "on end install" scripts and such be copied too to the new installation server ?
I need to easily create installation servers in 15 countries, this is the reason for my question...

Hi Kim Sonny,
hope you're doing fine
Regarding your question:
The "Load Balancing" was more a fail-over service and wasn't intended to use for several locations like in your case.
So the easiest way to do this is to setup one installation server and copy the files to the other servers. On the new Installation servers you only have to setup the service again and that's it.
Cheers,
Martin

Windows Load Balancing on Multiple VLAN?

Hi all. Just wondering if any of you having this same issue as I did. I've got NLB configured on 2 VM running on Hyper-V. Each of the VM equiped with 2 NIC. The NIC for heart beat purpose is configured
with Static MAC and with the option "Enable Spoofing for MAC Address" enabled. Another NIC is for LAN communication purose. Each of the NIC is reside on a different VLAN (VLANx and VLANy). After I've got the NLB configured,
with "unicast" mode. I've noticed I am not able to ping the NLB virtual IP address from any of the clients. Ping works between the NLB hosts, and is accessible. Once I've put all the NIC into the same VLAN, NLB works
fine; I can ping the NLB virtual IP, and test on IIS works good. My question, does NLB requires all the host to reside in the same VLAN? If NLB support mulitple VLAN, then how can I configure it to support multiple VLAN (eg: production LAN
NIC on VLANx, and heart beat NIC on VLANy)? Thank you.

Hi,
It seems that we need to use Multicast mode.
Configure Network Load Balancing Cluster Operation Mode
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc731616.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.

OSPF load balancing across multiple port channels

I have googled/searched for this everywhere but haven't been able to find a solution. Forgive me if I leave something out but I will try to convey all relevant information. Hopefully someone can provide some insight and many thanks in advance.
I have three switches (A, B, and C) that are all running OSPF and LACP port channelling among themselves on a production network. Each port channel interface contains two physical interfaces and trunks a single vlan (so a vlan connecting each switch over a port channel). OSPF is running on each vlan interface.
Switch A - ME3600
Switch B - 3550
Switch C - 3560G
This is just a small part of a much larger topology. This part forms a triangle, if you will, where A is the source and C is the destination. A and C connect directly via a port channel and are OSPF neighbors. A and B connect directly via a port channel and are OSPF neighbors. B and C connect directly via a port channel and are OSPF neighbors. Currently, all traffic from A to C traverses B. I would like to load balance traffic sourced from A with a destination of C on the direct link and on the links through B. If all traffic is passed through B, traffic is evenly split on the two interfaces on the port channel. If all traffic is pushed onto the direct A-C link, traffic is evenly balanced on the two interfaces on that port channel. If OSPF load balancing is configured on the two vlans from A (so A-C and A-B), the traffic is divided to each port channel but only one port on each port channel is utilized while the other one passes nothing. So half of each port channel remains unused. The port channel on B-C continues to load balance, evenly splitting the traffic received from half of the port channel from A.
A and C port channel load balancing is configured for src-dst-ip. B is a 3550 and does not have this option, so it is set to src-mac.
Relevant configuration:
Switch A:
interface Port-channel1
description Link to B
port-type nni
switchport trunk allowed vlan 11
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan11
ip address x.x.x.134 255.255.255.254
interface Port-channel3
description Link to C
port-type nni
switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan10
ip address x.x.x.152 255.255.255.254
Switch B:
interface Port-channel1
description Link to A
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 11
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan11
ip address x.x.x.135 255.255.255.254
interface Port-channel2
description Link to C
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 12
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan12
ip address x.x.x.186 255.255.255.254
Switch C:
interface Port-channel1
description Link to B
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 12
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan12
ip address x.x.x.187 255.255.255.254
interface Port-channel3
description Link to A
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
switchport mode trunk
interface Vlan10
ip address x.x.x.153 255.255.255.254

This is more FYI. 10.82.4.0/24 is a subnet on switch C. The path to it is split across vlans 10 and 11 but once it hits the port channel interfaces only one side of each is chosen. I'd like to avoid creating more vlan interfaces but right now that appears to be the only way to load balance equally across the four interfaces out of switch A.
ME3600#sh ip route 10.82.4.0
Routing entry for 10.82.4.0/24
Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 154, type extern 1
Last update from x.x.x.153 on Vlan10, 01:20:46 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
x.x.x.153, from 10.82.15.1, 01:20:46 ago, via Vlan10
Route metric is 154, traffic share count is 1
* x.x.x.135, from 10.82.15.1, 01:20:46 ago, via Vlan11
Route metric is 154, traffic share count is 1
ME3600#sh ip cef 10.82.4.0
10.82.4.0/24
nexthop x.x.x.135 Vlan11
nexthop x.x.x.153 Vlan10
ME3600#sh ip cef 10.82.4.0 internal
10.82.4.0/24, epoch 0, RIB[I], refcount 5, per-destination sharing
sources: RIB
ifnums:
Vlan10(1157): x.x.x.153
Vlan11(1192): x.x.x.135
path 093DBC20, path list 0937412C, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
nexthop x.x.x.135 Vlan11, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
path 093DC204, path list 0937412C, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
nexthop x.x.x.153 Vlan10, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
output chain:
loadinfo 088225C0, per-session, 2 choices, flags 0003, 88 locks
flags: Per-session, for-rx-IPv4
16 hash buckets
< 0 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 1 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 2 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 3 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 4 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 5 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 6 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 7 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
< 8 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
< 9 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
<10 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
<11 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
<12 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
<13 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
<14 > IP adj out of Vlan11, addr x.x.x.135 08EE7560
<15 > IP adj out of Vlan10, addr x.x.x.153 093A4E60
Subblocks:
None

Load balancing using multiple default routes

Hi Guys,
I just want to ask does creating multiple default routes on my router provides load-balancing on my WAN side? As far as i know, for example if I have two default routes on my router and let say I have two users connecting to the internet, the first one might go to the first WAN link while the second user might go to the second WAN link.
Thank you so much
Rex

there are the difference between, load balancing and load sharing..which we need to understand.
load sharing means you have 2 users, user A and User B, user A wants to use ISP1 and user B wants to use ISP2. this is called load sharing. and can be achieved via PBR (Policy based routing).
we should not try to use load balancing for Internet traffic with 2 different ISPs.

CSM - Load balance using Server CPU

Hi
I have a customer who requires the load-balancing prediction
algorithm to be based on the CPU level of the Server. So the server with the least CPU is chosen at the laod-balancing stage.
Is there a way to do this?
Thanks James

Hi James
With CSM the only option is DFP (Dynamic feed back protocol). If your application vendor provides DFP agents (which is very unlikely) for the application then these agents can be installed on App servers for the desired purpose.
Config details at
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/services_modules/csm/4.2.x/configuration/guide/rsfarms.html#wp1039774')">http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/services_modules/csm/4.2.x/configuration/guide/rsfarms.html#wp1039774
With ACE you can use SNMP based probes to achieve what you are looking for.
Syed Iftekhar Ahmed

Load balancing across multiple application servers not working with JCo RFC

We have a problem where inbound messages to the Mapping Runtime engine (ABAP -> J2EE) are not load balanced over application servers. However, load balancing does take place across server nodes within one application server.
Our system comprises of the following:
Central Instance (2 X server nodes)
Database Instance
2 X Dialog Instances (with 2 X server nodes each)
The 1st application server that starts is usually the one that is used for inbound messaging.
We have looked at the sap gateway configuration and have tried various options without much luck:
i.e.: local gateways vs. one central gateway, load balancing type by changing parameter gw/reg_lb_level, see: http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw70/helpdata/EN/bb/9f12f24b9b11d189750000e8322d00/frameset.htm
Here are our release levels:
SAP_ABA     700     0012     SAPKA70012
SAP_BASIS     700     0012     SAPKB70012
PI_BASIS     2005_1_700     0012     SAPKIPYJ7C
ST-PI     2005_1_700     0005     SAPKITLQI5
SAP_BW     700     0013     SAPKW70013
ST-A/PI     01J_BCO700     0000          -
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks

Tim
Did you follow the guide here:
How to Scale Up SAP Exchange Infrastructure 3.0
Learn what the most likely scaled system architecture looks like, and read about a step by step procedure to install additional dialog instances. The guide also walks you through additional configuration steps and the application of Support Package Stacks.
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/c3d9d710-0d01-0010-7486-9a51ab92b927
We followed this guide for XI3.0 and PI7.0 and works successfully!

Load balancing with multiple clusters (HTTPProxyServlet)

          Hello!
          I'm newbie in Weblogic. I would like to have clustering and load balancing in
          development environment. I've created 2 clusters, with one managed server each.
          I've created a web application for deploying the http proxy servlet and put it
          under another managed server without clustering. Below is my configuration:
          managed server without cluster (as proxy) - Port 8002
          admin server - Port 8001
          cluster_1 - multicast address 237.0.0.11, multicast port 8004, cluster address
          - t3://localhost:8006, t3://localhost:8007
          cluster_2 - multicast address 237.0.0.10, multicast port 8014, cluster address
          - t3://localhost:8006, t3://localhost:8007
          managed_cluster1 - under cluster_1, port 8006
          managed_cluster2 - under cluster_2, port 8007
          in the web.xml of the proxy, i put the following parameters:
          <param-name>WebLogicCluster</param-name>
          <param-value>localhost:8006|localhost:8007</param-value>
          However, when i send the requests to http://localhost:8002/sms, the requests always
          go to the same server, for eg: managed_cluster2?
          If i configure using single cluster, the load balancing will be in proper. What's
          the cause fo the problem? and any solution?
          Thanx in advance.
          Regards,
          joey


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 over multiple NIC cards

Is it possible to setup some kind of load balancing at the OS level on a V240 running Solaris 8?
I've got all 4 NIC cards populated (2 each on different subnets with clients coming from both subnets and elsewhere) and I've like to setup some load balancing at the operating system to (dynamically) route the load across the most appropriate interface. Is this possible? I feel I should be getting more bang for my buck here, but I just cant find any info on what I'd like to do.
Thanks for the help.

You can use IPMP in order to have load balancing for the outbound traffic. It's working fine, i have used it on many machines.
Now, if you want to trunk the throughput of your interfaces (for inbound and outbound traffic), you need to acquire sun trunking software. It can truncate up to 8 100Mbps interfaces, or up to 2 1Gbps interfaces.

Round robin DNS for load balancing between multiple network adapters (Xserve)

I'm attempting to use 'round robin' DNS to load balance between the two ethernet adapters of an Xserve.
Both ethernet adapters are connected to the same LAN and have static IP addresses of 192.168.2.250 and 192.168.2.251.
The DNS zone for the server's local domain/host (macserver.private) has a machine record with both IP addresses (set up in the Lion Server UI).
Having read up on round robin DNS, I would have expected DNS requests for 'macserver.private' to be answered with the two IP addresses ordered at random, achiving my aim of requests being served at random via each ethernet adapter.
However this doesn't seem to be the case. Doing a 'nslookup' from any of the network clients results in the two IP addresses being listed in the same order everytime. And pinging 'macserver.private' only ever results in a response from the same address.
Does anyone know why this is the case? Does Lion Server use a non-standard DNS configuration? Are there any additional settings I need to configure in Lion's DNS server to make adopt a round robin approach to responding to requests?
Thanks in advance for any help!

Be careful what you wish for
Round Robin DNS is rarely the best option for 'load balancing'. At the very least it's subject to caching at various point on the network - even at the client side, once the client looks up the address it will cache that response - this means that subsequent lookups may be served from the client's cache and not refer back to the server. Therfore any given client will always see the same address until the cache expires.
I suspect this is what you're seeing.
You can minimize this by setting a lower TTL on the records. This should result in the response being cached for a shorter period, meaning the client will make more requests to the server, with a higher change of using the 'other' address.
However, you're also going to run into issues with the server having two interfaces/addresses in the same LAN. This isn't recommended.
As Jonathon mentioned, you may be better off just bonding the two interfaces. This will provide an automatic level of dynamic load balancing without the latency of DNS caches, as well as automatic failover should one link fail (as opposed to round robin DNS which will cause 50% of requests to fail until the client cache expires and a new lookup is performed (and, even then, there's still a chance the client will try to use the failed link).

HttpClusterServlet Proxy Load Balancing with Multiple Clusters

          How do I load balance JSPs and Servlets using the HttpClusterServlet proxy server
          approach when I have more than one cluster?
          It appears from the docs that there is a 1 to 1 relationship between the non-clustered
          managed proxy server that has the HttpClusterServlet and the cluster (1 proxy
          to 1 cluster).


Preferred method would be domain, domainhash, url or urlhash as described in:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/bsccfggd/contrule.htm#xtocid2610122.
do not recommend to use round-robin method for load balancing internet proxies. It creates inefficient usage of the storage and bandwidth, as more proxies can have to cache the same objects.

Load Balancing across Multiple DMZ's

Can you split one Css11503 across two separate DMZ's securely. I have a group of server that are currently being load balanced in one DMZ I now have a requirement to Load balance another set of server in another DMZ is it possible spilt the CSS across two DMZ's and still maintain a high level of Security

You need a separate CSS for each interface of the firewall.
If you use the same CSS for 2 DMZ, traffic inter DMZ will be routed by CSS and will bypass the firewall.
Gilles.

Load balancing among multiple CPU

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for