Load balancing problem with CSS11503

Hello all,
We have two web servers that are being load balanced with this configuration on two CSS11503 with IOS version 7.20 Build 206;
content Web
add service web1
add service web2
vip address 10.1.4.4
protocol tcp
port 80
url "/*"
advanced-balance sticky-srcip-dstport
active
When we try and access the web servers from client workstation using the URL on Internet explorer 6.0 and get authenticated through the login window; we get error 12031. Error 12031 means " ERROR_INTERNET_CONNECTION_RESET The connection with the server has been reset. "
On refresh the error goes away.
If we bypass the content switches by accessing any of the servers using server name; the error does not appear. The problem seems to be related to the load balancing.
Any suggestions?

the problem is probably due to CSS sending an HTTP redirect with the RESET flag when you send multiple request inside the same connection.
To avoid the proble, do a 'no url' under your content rule.
There is absolutely no need to specify the url since you do stickyness based on source ip address.
Regards,
Gilles.

Similar Messages

Load Balancing Problem with WLS6.1

          Hi,
          I have 4 Instances of Weblogic servers two instance per box with Clustered. The
          admin server is running in the first box. While stress testing it seems all the
          loads are going to one instance and other instances are almost idle.
          In the Secondary Group, i have given the name of the other instance on the same
          server. I'm running weblogic in Solaris with SP3.
          Can anyone suggest why loadbalancing doesn't work.


Typically, load balancing will work unless there is a problem with the
          clusters seeing each other. Therefore first make sure that the managed
          server has joined the cluster.
          Other things to look at are the __WebLogicBridgeConfig (see WLS plugin
          documents) to confirm that there is a primary and secondary.
          The above assumes Servlet load balancing, for objects check the
          deployment descriptors.
          Diwan Mohideen wrote:
          >
          > Hi,
          >
          > I have 4 Instances of Weblogic servers two instance per box with Clustered. The
          > admin server is running in the first box. While stress testing it seems all the
          > loads are going to one instance and other instances are almost idle.
          >
          > In the Secondary Group, i have given the name of the other instance on the same
          > server. I'm running weblogic in Solaris with SP3.
          >
          > Can anyone suggest why loadbalancing doesn't work.

Networking load balancing - problem with backup network

The thing is, that if I setup hosts in cluster to use backup Network, the vitual IP and FQDN will not answer. If I utilize domain Network for clustering, it works okay. I´m not sure, what is the best way to configure it when using NLB. My backup Network
is configured to use different vLAN and tcp/ip settings have only IP and subnet mask. Gateway adress is not in use.
I have been playing with fail-over cluster which is different technology, and there backup Network is different from production Network, locating in different vLAN so the connector between 2 nodes is totally different that production/domain Network.
But with NLB, this seems not working.

Hi yannara,
Please offer us more information about your environment, such as are your using the virtualization environment? What your server edition you are using, what backup software
you are using。
Please refer the following related article and similar thread to check whether you have choose the specific interface.
Windows Server 2008 R2 NLB with multiple NIC and multi subnet.
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windowsserver/en-US/fbfcb496-44d3-4050-bb92-34f4cc808f57/windows-server-2008-r2-nlb-with-multiple-nic-and-multi-subnet
Balancing Act: Dual-NIC Configuration with Windows Server 2008 NLB Clusters
http://blogs.technet.com/b/networking/archive/2008/11/20/balancing-act-dual-nic-configuration-with-windows-server-2008-nlb-clusters.aspx
I’m glad to be of help to you!
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.

WebCache load balancing problem

I am having a problem with Web Cache distributing load to 4 origin servers. It turns out that one Origin server received 24 times less requests than another, despite the fact that they configured the same way.
here is my configuration of production site:
Radware load balancer ( LB) with cyclic algoritm received requests from users.
LB distrubuted request to 4 dedicated webcache servers running as a one clusted with the same number for capacity for each server.
This cluster in turn forward missed requests to 4 application servers (Oracle HTTP and OC4j running J2EE apps). Those 4 servers connected in 2 clusters with 2 servers each. Session failover is disabled.
The problem is that one server has 60 session and another only 1.
Here is some statistics I collected from WebCache admin pages:
Request served to origin servers:
     cache1     cache2     cache3     cache4     total
serv5     1095     704     1102     8206     11107
serv6     2190     9414     9829     3404     24837
serv7     58     481     465     92     1096
serv8     10113     1145     1102     934     13294
as you may see serv7 does not get his share of requests.
Does anybody experienced the same problem or have any idea where to look for answer?
thanks

Does your application require session binding?
You may want to contact Oracle Support to review your configuration setttings.

SIP load balancing issue with ACE 4710

SIP Load balancing Issue with ACE 4710
I have a Cisco ace 4710 with vesion Version A4(2.2). i configued simple SIP load balancing first without stickiness. without stikeiness we are having a problem because bye packet at the was not going to the same server all the time that left our port in used even though user hang up the phone. its happen randmly. i have a total 20 licenced ports and its fill out very quickly. so i dicided to use the stickiness with call-ID but still same issue. below is the config
rserver host CIN-VOX-31
ip address 172.20.130.31
inservice
rserver host CIN-VOX-32
ip address 172.20.130.32
inservice
serverfarm host CIN-VOX
probe SIP-5060
rserver CIN-VOX-31
    inservice
rserver CIN-VOX-32
    inservice
sticky sip-header Call-ID VOX_SIP_GROUP
timeout 1
timeout activeconns
replicate sticky
serverfarm CIN-VOX
class-map match-all CIN_VOX_L4_CLASS
2 match virtual-address 172.22.12.30 any
class-map match-all CIN_VOX_SIP_L4_CLASS
2 match virtual-address 172.22.12.30 udp eq sip
policy-map type loadbalance sip first-match CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
class class-default
    sticky-serverfarm VOX_SIP_GROUP
policy-map multi-match GLOBAL_DMZ_POLICY
   class CIN_VOX_SIP_L4_CLASS
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply
class CIN_VOX_L4_CLASS
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply
interface vlan 20
description VIP_DMZ_VLAN
ip address 172.22.12.4 255.255.255.192
alias 172.22.12.3 255.255.255.192
peer ip address 172.22.12.5 255.255.255.192
access-group input PERMIT-ANY-LB
service-policy input GLOBAL_DMZ_POLICY
could you please help me on this...
thanks
Rakesh Patel

I mean there should be one more statement-
class-map type sip loadbalance match-any CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
match sip header Call_ID header-value sip:
and that will be called under-
policy-map multi-match GLOBAL_DMZ_POLICY
   class CIN_VOX_SIP_L4_CLASS
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy CIN_VOX_LB_SIP_POLICY
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply
is that missing in your config ?

Recommended configuration for load balanced Portal with load balancer, multiple gateways and multiple servers.

Does anyone have a recommended network, hardware and software configuration guide for a Portal installation running with multiple gateways load balanced (ie one URL) that talk to multiple servers?

David,
We've used Resonate (software) to load balance the gateways. It allows
you to group all the gateways under 1 virtual URL and load balance the
incoming connections over each gateway depending on the rules that you
define in Resonate. Look in the SUN portal whitepapers there is one that
talks about it specifically.
As far as load balancing the calls to the portals, the gateways will
automatically load balance across all the portals that they know about
using a simple round-robin rotation. You may be able to use Resonate in
front of the portals but you may need to activate persistance within
Resonate to ensure that the user always ends up on the portal that he
established his initial connection on (if you want that), check with Sun
on this one.
David Broeren wrote:
Recommended configuration for load balanced Portal with load balancer,
multiple gateways and multiple servers.
Does anyone have a recommended network, hardware and software
configuration guide for a Portal installation running with multiple
gateways load balanced (ie one URL) that talk to multiple servers?
Try our New Web Based Forum at http://softwareforum.sun.com
Includes Access to our Product Knowledge Base!

Load Balance Problem in Oracle RAC 10.2.0.4 (two nodes with CRS)

Hi all,
I have an Oracle RAC 10.2.0.4 with two nodes and I'm having problems with sessions load balance.
The problem is that all connections are going to the node which is enabled as 'master' in RAC, the node who has located .db resource in CRS.
If .db resource is located in node1 all connections are made in node1. In the same way, all connections are made in node2 when .db resource from CRS stack is located in node2.
The connections are made by a pool in Tomcat 6 using RAC service for made the connections.
Any idea?
Thanks in advance.
Here is an example of my net configuration:
listener.ora in node1:
LISTENER_RAC_NODE1 =
(DESCRIPTION_LIST =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node1_vip)(PORT = 1525)(IP = FIRST))
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node1)(PORT = 1525)(IP = FIRST))
tnsnames in node1:
LISTENERS_RAC =
(ADDRESS_LIST =
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node1_vip)(PORT = 1525))
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node2_vip)(PORT = 1525))
NODE1 =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node1_vip)(PORT = 1525))
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node1)(PORT = 1525))
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SERVER = DEDICATED)
(SERVICE_NAME = rac)
(INSTANCE_NAME = rac1)
RAC =
(DESCRIPTION =
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node1_vip)(PORT = 1525))
(ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = node2_vip)(PORT = 1525))
(LOAD_BALANCE = yes)
(CONNECT_DATA =
(SERVER = DEDICATED)
(SERVICE_NAME = rac)
********************************************************

It is my fault.
It was the connection service. I had one one with preferred option and one without it. Now is working well.

ACE Load Balancing Problem

Hi,
I have ACE 4701 with c4710ace-mz.A3_2_2.bin image. In the current setup ACE is located in the center of network where all the WAN, Intenret and LAN is connected and ACE has default towards Internet and All other segment has default route towards ACE appliance. ACe is only redirecting the port 80 traffic to my Proxy server and bypass my lan subnet on port 80.
Internet
i
i
i
i
i
ACE--------------------------------WAN
i
i
i
i
LAN
I want to use ACE for the load balancing of two servers. Today I did the load balancing configuration but as soon as I applied the policy map on the interface vlan 200 and 300, my complete network reachability went down. When I remove the policy my network came back to normal.
192.168.200.66 FAX Server-1
192.1168.200.67 FAX Server-2
192.168.200.65   Virtual IP address
Attached is the configuration that I did on ACE for the load balancing and below is the current configuration of the ACE appliance.
access-list acl-in remark ACCESS LIST FOR ACE-INSIDE
access-list acl-in line 1 extended permit ip any any
access-list acl-out remark ACCESS LIST FOR ACE-OUTSIDE
access-list acl-out line 1 extended permit ip any any
access-list acl-proxy remark ACCESS LIST FOR PROXY SEGMENT
access-list acl-proxy line 1 extended permit ip any any
access-list acl-wan remark ACCESS LIST FOR WAN SEGMENT
access-list acl-wan line 1 extended permit ip any any
probe tcp PROBE_5050
port 5050
interval 15
passdetect interval 60
open 1
probe tcp PROBE_5101
port 5101
interval 15
passdetect interval 60
open 1
probe tcp PROBE_TCP
port 80
interval 15
passdetect interval 60
open 1
parameter-map type http PARAMAP_CASE
case-insensitive
no persistence-rebalance
rserver host RS_BCPR01
ip address 192.168.0.103
inservice
rserver host RS_BCPR02
ip address 192.168.0.104
inservice
rserver host RT_fax1
description Right Fax Server-1
ip address 192.168.200.66
rserver host RT_fax2
description Right Fax Server-2
ip address 192.168.200.67
serverfarm host SF_BCPR
transparent
probe PROBE_5050
probe PROBE_5101
probe PROBE_TCP
rserver RS_BCPR01
inservice
rserver RS_BCPR02
inservice
serverfarm host SF_RT_fax
rserver RT_fax1
rserver RT_fax2
sticky ip-netmask 255.255.255.255 address source STICKY-SOURCE
replicate sticky
serverfarm SF_BCPR
sticky ip-netmask 255.255.255.255 address source FAX-STICKY
replicate sticky
serverfarm SF_RT_fax
class-map type management match-any CM_ALL
2 match protocol snmp any
3 match protocol http any
4 match protocol https any
5 match protocol icmp any
6 match protocol telnet any
class-map match-any CM_BYPASS_FOR_LAN
3 match virtual-address 100.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 tcp eq www
8 match virtual-address 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 tcp eq www
9 match virtual-address 172.16.0.0 255.255.0.0 tcp eq www
10 match virtual-address 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 tcp eq www
class-map match-any CM_BYPASS_SUBNET
9 match virtual-address 100.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 tcp eq www
13 match virtual-address 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 tcp eq www
14 match virtual-address 172.16.0.0 255.255.0.0 tcp eq www
15 match virtual-address 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 tcp eq www
class-map match-any CM_IM
2 match virtual-address 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 tcp eq 5050
3 match virtual-address 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 tcp eq 1080
4 match virtual-address 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 tcp eq 5101
class-map match-all CM_SF_BCPR
255 match virtual-address 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 tcp eq www
class-map match-any RT_FAX
2 match virtual-address 192.168.200.65 0.0.0.0 any
policy-map type management first-match PM_ALL
class CM_ALL
permit
policy-map type loadbalance http first-match PM_L7_BYPASS_FOR_LAN_HTTP
class class-default
forward
policy-map type loadbalance http first-match PM_L7_BYPASS_HTTP
class class-default
forward
policy-map type loadbalance first-match PM_LB_RT_FAX
class class-default
sticky-serverfarm FAX-STICKY
policy-map type loadbalance http first-match PM_LB_SF_BCPROXY
class class-default
sticky-serverfarm STICKY-SOURCE
policy-map multi-match PM_BYPASS_FOR_LAN_HTTP
class CM_BYPASS_FOR_LAN
loadbalance vip inservice
loadbalance policy PM_L7_BYPASS_FOR_LAN_HTTP
policy-map multi-match PM_BYPASS_HTTP
class CM_BYPASS_SUBNET
loadbalance vip inservice
loadbalance policy PM_L7_BYPASS_HTTP
policy-map multi-match PM_MAIN_BCPROXY
class CM_SF_BCPR
loadbalance vip inservice
loadbalance policy PM_LB_SF_BCPROXY
loadbalance vip icmp-reply active
appl-parameter http advanced-options PARAMAP_CASE
class CM_IM
loadbalance vip inservice
loadbalance policy PM_LB_SF_BCPROXY
policy-map multi-match PM_RT_FAX
class RT_FAX
loadbalance vip inservice
loadbalance policy PM_LB_RT_FAX
service-policy input PM_ALL
interface vlan 100
description FW-INSIDE CONTEXT RACK1
ip address 192.168.0.5 255.255.255.224
alias 192.168.0.11 255.255.255.224
peer ip address 192.168.0.6 255.255.255.224
mac-address autogenerate
no icmp-guard
access-group input acl-out
no shutdown
interface vlan 200
description WAN-VLAN CONTEXT RACK1
ip address 192.168.0.33 255.255.255.224
alias 192.168.0.43 255.255.255.224
peer ip address 192.168.0.34 255.255.255.224
mac-address autogenerate
access-group input acl-wan
service-policy input PM_BYPASS_HTTP
service-policy input PM_MAIN_BCPROXY
no shutdown
interface vlan 300
description ACE-INSIDE CONTEXT RACK1
ip address 192.168.0.65 255.255.255.224
alias 192.168.0.73 255.255.255.224
peer ip address 192.168.0.66 255.255.255.224
mac-address autogenerate
access-group input acl-in
service-policy input PM_BYPASS_FOR_LAN_HTTP
service-policy input PM_BYPASS_HTTP
service-policy input PM_MAIN_BCPROXY
no shutdown
interface vlan 301
description BC-VLAN CONTEXT RACK1
ip address 192.168.0.97 255.255.255.224
alias 192.168.0.107 255.255.255.224
peer ip address 192.168.0.98 255.255.255.224
mac-address autogenerate
access-group input acl-proxy
no shutdown
ft track interface TRACKING_FOR_FT_VLAN
track-interface vlan 300
peer track-interface vlan 300
priority 255
peer priority 255
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1
Please help me out what i am missing. Is there any limitation on policy map or my bypass subnet list is creating problem.

I did these changes this time nothing disconnected but I am not able to do the Remote desktop on the virtual IP address. Real IP has Remote desktop enabled even VIP is not ping able for me.
rserver host RT_fax1
description Right Fax Server-1
ip address 192.168.200.66
inservice
rserver host RT_fax2
description Right Fax Server-2
ip address 192.168.200.67
inservice
serverfarm host SF_RT_fax
rserver RT_fax1
    inservice
rserver RT_fax2
    inservice
policy-map type loadbalance rdp first-match PM_LB_RT_FAX
class class-default
    serverfarm SF_RT_fax
policy-map multi-match PM_RT_FAX
class RT_FAX
    loadbalance vip inservice
    loadbalance policy PM_LB_RT_FAX
    loadbalance vip icmp-reply active
interface vlan 200
description WAN-VLAN CONTEXT RACK1
ip address 192.168.0.33 255.255.255.224
alias 192.168.0.43 255.255.255.224
peer ip address 192.168.0.34 255.255.255.224
mac-address autogenerate
access-group input acl-wan
service-policy input PM_BYPASS_HTTP
service-policy input PM_MAIN_BCPROXY
service-policy input PM_RT_FAX
no shutdown
interface vlan 300
description ACE-INSIDE CONTEXT RACK1
ip address 192.168.0.65 255.255.255.224
alias 192.168.0.73 255.255.255.224
peer ip address 192.168.0.66 255.255.255.224
mac-address autogenerate
access-group input acl-in
service-policy input PM_BYPASS_FOR_LAN_HTTP
service-policy input PM_BYPASS_HTTP
service-policy input PM_MAIN_BCPROXY
service-policy input PM_RT_FAX
no shutdown
But nothing is working for me. Please help me out. This time i didnt configure the sticky. But in real I will go with sticky and complete IP protocol will be use a VIP. Please help me out.

Load balancing problem

We need a load balancing setup that share the load for many web applications on multiple backend servers, but we don’t want the web apps to be activated on all backend servers at the same time. We want to configure all apps as “lazy” on all backend servers. They will then be activated when the first request to their DNS is made. Then the app is started on that backend server.
We have hundreds of apps and each backend server will become very slow if all apps are activated on all backend servers. The preferred solution would therefore be to not call all DNS names on all backend servers but to share the balance based on the DNS name in the requests. Sticky-session or sticky source-IP won’t be enough to solve this as they only stick to each user session.
If User-A request www.siteA.com he may be redirected to backend server 1 and then be kept there. But if User-B then requests the same www.siteA.com he may be redirected to backend server 2 and then be kept there. This means that the web application for siteA will be activated and loaded in both the backend servers. When we host hundreds of sites this will be a problem. We may have hundreds of backend servers but they will all end up loading all web apps over time and get out of memory.
The theory to get this work is a load balancer with the following logic:
1.     A request for a certain DNS comes in. For example: www.siteA.com
2.     Load balancer checks if this certain DNS has been redirected to a certain backend server before and if this server is alive
2.1.     (If not redirected before): Redirect the request to the backend server with least load. Store the selected backend route based on the DNS name.
2.2.     (If redirected before): Redirect the request to the assigned backend server for siteA.
3.     If a backend server is down then all DNS requests to this server will be redirected to another backend server with least load. All requests to these DNS names will be assigned to this backend server instead.
h3. Example of set up
Many DNS to one IP
192.168.1.1 www.siteA.com
192.168.1.1 www.siteB.com
192.168.1.1 www.siteC.com
Frontend load balancer
192.168.1.1 (load balancer)
Backend app servers
192.168.2.2 (App server 1)
192.168.2.3 (App server 2)
192.168.2.4 (App server 3)
h3. Snapshot of servers during load
App server 1
www.siteA.com (Activated)
www.siteB.com (Lazy)
www.siteC.com (Lazy)
App server 2
www.siteA.com (Lazy)
www.siteB.com (Activated)
www.siteC.com (Lazy)
App server 3
www.siteA.com (Lazy)
www.siteB.com (Lazy)
www.siteC.com (Activated)

Only from load balancing point of view cluster is not really needed.
apart from session replication and failover capabilities, few more benefits are there with clustering only if you are using a web server also.
Stuck threads can be due to lot's of problems like application issues, load issues etc, So first make sure you are getting stuck thread on both servers or only on one, if on one, then in this case your load balancing not working properly and sending more load to that server, and if you are getting stuck threads on both then try to add one more managed server.
Regards
Mukesh Negi
http://weblogicserveradministration.blogspot.com

Hardware clustering/load balancing/failover with Tomcat

Hello forum!
I recently bought a Cisco 1801, and it sure is capable! Anyhow, I've got a hobby website that is getting a fair bit of traffic - approaching too much for one node to handle and it's time to start thinking about distributing the load.
I'd like to do a little clustering of server nodes running Apache Geronimo, which is J2EE running atop Apache Tomcat. For the sake of keeping things generic, let's just call it Tomcat because it configures the same way.
I do not run Apache HTTP Server as a proxy, I only run Tomcat directly connected to the internet. I do this for performance reasons.
Anyhow, I'm wondering if any of you evil geniuses could suggest a way that I could cluster Tomcat nodes directly using the router to serve as a hardware load balancer and have the whole sticky session thing with failover, etc... All of the documents I find on the subject discuss clustering by way of Apache HTTP with Mod_JK.
I have already asked this question on the hardware side, and got great information about the capable load balancing features my router sports (but limited compared to Cisco CSS products.)
Now I'm wondering if anyone has experience taking an open source application server like Geronimo or Tomcat or JBoss and clustering it using hardware load balancing. What kinds of Tomcat configurations, if any, do I need to add for things like sticky sessions and failover? Or, is all that automatic?
Thanks so much for reading and for any replies. If there is a better forum for my question, please direct me there.
Cheers,
Dave Woldrich
http://CardMeeting.com

This occurs rarely when the Tomcat process is not able to connect to the database. The database connection problem is an internal cause which manifests externally as missing fields in reports.
Workaround: Restart the Apache process and the Tomcat process. From the CLI on your CiscoWorks Server, enter the following commands in the specified sequence:
1. pdterm Apache
2. pdterm Tomcat
3. pdexec Tomcat
4. pdexec Apache

Printer Pool load balancing problem.

We seem to be having a problem with printer load balancing working correctly. I have several computer labs. Each lab has at least 2 printers of the same type. As a result I pool the printers for each lab. We are still running ZCM10.3.4. Most of the clients are running iprint 5.82. With Zenworks 7 and 6.5 load balancing on these printers worked very well and page counts stayed very close on each printer. Now that we are at ZCM10 and have been for about 3 years now we continually see that one printer gets the majority of jobs. Most of the computers are imaged but printers are installed after imaging. Even if we alternate the default printer on the computer print jobs still mostly come out the same printer. All printers except 3 are HP and in our case they are all new HP M602's with a couple older HP4015DN's thrown in when the new HP M602's would print garbage across the wan and the 4015's would print correctly but that is another topic.
Am I misunderstanding how load balancing is supposed to work? Isn't load balancing supposed to be one of the features of printer pooling in addition to sending jobs to the printer that is not busy at the time the job is sent? How is load balancing set up?
Thank you.

are you using any front end web server or hardware load balancer ? verify your load balancing if it's happening or not properly between your clustered managed servers.
Regards
Mukesh Negi
http://weblogicserveradministration.blogspot.com/

HttpClusterServlet Load Balancing Problem

          Hi,
          I have a problem with LoadBalancing and HttpClusterServlet.
          I have 2 boxes, with a clustered application, deployed on 2 managed servers
          box 1 with adminServer and and a managed server (managed1)
          box 2 with second managed server (managed2)
          on box 1 I have another managed server, which hosts the HttpClusterServlet application
          The cluster is made up of managed1 & managed2, and httpClusterServlet is configured
          to send requests to boths the managed servers in the cluster.
          When I run some tests against the httpClusterServlet web application to see how
          it load-balances requests, I can see that all the requests are redirected just
          to managed1,
          on the same machine.
          If I stop managed1, and run some tests, I can see that httpCluster every time
          tries to contact managed1 first, and since it's down, sends the requests to managed2(handles
          failover correctly).
          If I move the httpClusterServlet application to another box, let's call it box
          3, and re run the tests, it will load-balances the requests between managed1 (box1)
          and managed2(box2) correctly.
          I would like to know if httpClusterServlet has some kind of "server affinity"
          logic (?) or I'm missing something in the cluster configuration (even if I can't
          see clearly how the cluster configuration could affect things, since HttpServlet,
          which is not in the cluster, just should route
          requests to the specified servers in round-robin fashion, I guess)
          Someone in previous posts pointed out http session issues, is it true? and so,
          why?
          Sorry for the far too long post,
          thanks in advance,
          Thomas


Only from load balancing point of view cluster is not really needed.
apart from session replication and failover capabilities, few more benefits are there with clustering only if you are using a web server also.
Stuck threads can be due to lot's of problems like application issues, load issues etc, So first make sure you are getting stuck thread on both servers or only on one, if on one, then in this case your load balancing not working properly and sending more load to that server, and if you are getting stuck threads on both then try to add one more managed server.
Regards
Mukesh Negi
http://weblogicserveradministration.blogspot.com

ACA load balancing problem

Hi,
I have a problem with my CSS aca algorithm as shown from the following show load and show service summary:
CSS1# sh service summary
Service Name State Conn Weight Avg State
Load Transitions
BancsLinkSrvr-1 Alive 11 1 2 344
BancsLinkSrvr-2 Alive 0 1 2 268
CSS1# sh load
Global load information:
Reporting:Enabled
Calculation method:Relative
Step Size:Dynamic Configured:10 Actual:320
Threshold:254 Ageout-Timer:60
Teardown-timer: Configured:20 Actual:20
Service load information:
Average Average Peak Average
Service Name Load Number ResponseTime Response Time
BancsLinkSrvr-1 15 4497 451234
BancsLinkSrvr-2 2 0 350657
it's not able to balance the load between the two servers. the average response time is ZERO. what does that mean ?
any advice please ? what can i troublshoot to find out the problem ??

sorry the output is not clear,
please check the attached file
regards,
hasan

Bind Load balancing problem..expert help required

Hi there.
My RV042 has 2 WAN connections. One is connected to a Public Internet (WAN1) and the DMZ/Internet to my VPN router (WAN2)
Behind the VPN router connected t my WAN2 is the finance servers at network 10.36.88.0
Both users local and those who connects using PPTP VPN clients can access resources in the LAN
My problem is that due the round robin of load balancing sometimes they cannot reach the finance server
I tried playing bind the HTTP port and creating some rules with no luck
We want our users to use the WAN1 for all the web pages except those behind the VPN
Is there a way i can make that if my users access my finance server they go trough the WAN2?
Could you please provide me some guidance? (Rules, binds. etc)
in thi case woul be
An access rule or bind that all the WEB traffic for 10.36.88.0 flows to WAN2.

If you type "show real" you will probably see the column for "Data In" rising. This column is all the way on the right side of the display. This indicates that the server has received requests that it has not responded to.
By default, the LD does not use the Data value to fail a server. So by default, the data threshold for all the real servers is "0". If you set it to a non-zero number, the LD will start to use it.
http://www/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/iaabu/localdir/ldv42/421guide/42ch05.htm#xtocid856528
localdirector(config)# data 192.168.1.1:0:0:tcp 30
Hope this helps,
Steve Hall
Cisco TAC

RV320, load balancing problem

Hi,
How do I force the router to use WAN1 till it's saturated, and ther switch to WAN2 when needed. I've already configured the bandwidth correctly for each WAN, but it seems that some clients use WAN1, others use WAN2, disregarding the fact that they should use WAN1 as primary and the bandwidth it's not saturated by any other client.

Only from load balancing point of view cluster is not really needed.
apart from session replication and failover capabilities, few more benefits are there with clustering only if you are using a web server also.
Stuck threads can be due to lot's of problems like application issues, load issues etc, So first make sure you are getting stuck thread on both servers or only on one, if on one, then in this case your load balancing not working properly and sending more load to that server, and if you are getting stuck threads on both then try to add one more managed server.
Regards
Mukesh Negi
http://weblogicserveradministration.blogspot.com

Load balancing problem with CSS11503

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for