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>

Similar Messages

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

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.

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!

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

Reverse Proxy and Load Balancer for SMP 2.3 and Agentry Application

Hi Expert,
I'm putting in place a mobile solution composed by SMP 2.3 SPS 4 and SAP ECC 6.0. In the SMP 2.3 I created the agentry server and I have deployed my agentry application.
My SMP/Agentry infrastructure is composed by two servers therefore I need a load balancer for balance the load into the several servers. Furthermore I need to use a reverse proxy in my DMZ zone.
Based on what indicated in the SAP note "1904213 - SAP Mobile Platform Server Release Information" the Apache Reverse Proxy is not supported for Agentry clients. Agentry uses nginx for Reverse Proxy.
I also found the following document How-to-Guide for Reverse Proxy and Load Balancing in SAP Mobile Platform 3.x that explain how to set-up a reverse proxy and load balancer with nginx and apache.
Both the SAP note and the HOW to document are refereed to SMP 3.0 and not to SMP 2.3.
I would know if the NGINX must be used also for SMP 2.3.
Any suggestion/information is appreciated.
Thanks in advance
g.

Please see Agentry Network Landscapes

Cache and Load Balancing with Oracle APEX Listener

Hi,
I intend to use only HTTP access.
How to implement a Cache and Load Balancing with the Oracle APEX Listener?
Is it possible to do with the the standalone running APEX Listener?
Thanks by advance for any tips/documentation/references.
Kind Regards.

Hi,
I think this question is best asked in the APEX Listener forum:
ORDS, SODA & JSON in the Database
Kind regards
Sandro

Cache and Load Balancing for the Oracle APEX Listener

Hi,
I intend to use only HTTP access.
My database is Oracle 11gR2, SE, 32 bit.
How to implement a Cache and Load Balancing with the Oracle APEX Listener?
Is it possible to do with the the standalone running APEX Listener?
Thanks by advance for any tips/documentation/references.
Kind Regards.

Error. To be closed.

Cache and Load Balancing for Oracle APEX Listener

Hi,
I intend to use only HTTP access.
The database I use is Oracle11gR2 SE 32bit.
How to implement a Cache and Load Balancing with the Oracle APEX Listener?
Is it possible to do with the the standalone running APEX Listener?
Thanks by advance for any tips/documentation/references.
Kind Regards.

Error. To be closed.

PIX Redundant Internet Line and Load balancing

I would like to find out if it's possible to configure my Cisco PIX 525 to use a secondary internet line from a different provider and perform load balancing. I'm using PIX Version 6.3(1)

PIX version 6.3 does not support Redundancy and load balancing. but PIX/ ASA with version 7.0 supports Redundancy.

VPN device with dual ISP, fail-over, and load balancing

We currently service a client that has a PIX firewall that connects to multiple, separate outside vendors via IPSEC VPN. The VPN connections are mission critical and if for any reason the VPN device or the internet connection (currently only a T1) goes down, the business goes down too. We're looking for a solution that allows dual-ISP, failover, and load balancing. I see that there are several ASA models as well as the IOS that support this but what I'm confused about is what are the requirements for the other end of the VPN, keeping in mind that the other end will always be an outside vendor and out of our control. Current VPN endpoints for outside vendors are to devices like VPN 3000 Concentrator, Sonicwall, etc. that likely do not support any type of fail-over, trunking, load-balancing. Is this just not possible?

Unless I am mistaken the ASA doesn't do VPN Load Balancing for point-to-point IPSec connections either. What you're really after is opportunistic connection failover, and/or something like DMVPN. Coordinating opportunistic failover shouldn't be too much of an issue with the partners, but be prepared for lot of questions.

Data Centre Interconnection - firewall and load balancer deployment

Hi all,
I've read lots of Cisco docs/white papers on DCI - Layer 2 extension between DCs, but as yet I cannot find any decent information on how best to deploy firewalls and load balancers in such a design. I've seen refs to FHRP isolation on Nexus 7k (and possible 6k if you use DCI block) but nothing on the services elements.
The services element seems to be a complete minefield here:
- active/standby across sites, or deploy resilient pairs in each site?
- how to align optimal traffic flows inbound and ooutbound (RHI, SNAT, etc.)
- best practice suggestions ideally.
Cisco DCI docs seem to always gloss over the fact that most customers would have to deal with firewalls and load balancers here, and simply refer to 'coming soon' for that info.
If anyone has any good suggestions/links to docs explaining detailed implementation info would be much appreciate
Thanks
Phil

You might want to check out this new product called ITD.
Simple and faster solution:
ITD provides :
ASIC based multi-terabit/s L3/L4 load-balancing at line-rate
No service module or external L3/L4 load-balancer needed. Every N7k port can be used as load-balancer.
Redirect line-rate traffic to any devices, for example web cache engines, Web Accelerator Engines (WAE), video-caches, etc.
Capability to create clusters of devices, for example, Firewalls, Intrusion Prevention System (IPS), or Web Application Firewall (WAF), Hadoop cluster
IP-stickiness
Resilient (like resilient ECMP)
VIP based L4 load-balancing
NAT (available for EFT/PoC). Allows non-DSR deployments.
Weighted load-balancing
Load-balances to large number of devices/servers
ACL along with redirection and load balancing simultaneously.
Bi-directional flow-coherency. Traffic from A-->B and B-->A goes to same node.
Order of magnitude OPEX savings : reduction in configuration, and ease of deployment
Order of magnitude CAPEX savings : Wiring, Power, Rackspace and Cost savings
The servers/appliances don’t have to be directly connected to N7k
Monitoring the health of servers/appliances.
N + M redundancy.
Automatic failure handling of servers/appliances.
VRF support, vPC support, VDC support
Supported on both Nexus 7000 and Nexus 7700 series.
Supports both IPv4 and IPv6
N5k / N6k support : coming soon
Blog
At a glance
ITD config guide
Email Query or feedback:[email protected]

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?

What does per Wlan Band select and load balancing do ?

Good morning.....We recently upgraded our controllers from 4.2.185 to 6.0.188 and have noticed many clients having connectivity issues. We have Aggressive load balancing turned off globally but have noticed that band select and load balancing are enabled on the
Wlan. Are these settings mutually exclusive or do they do the same thing ? Does the Wlan setting override the default ? We have noticed that there is
output doing "debug dot11 load-balancing"
Thanx.....Dave

I believe we never had load balancing turned on when running 5.2 code. We jumped from 5.2 to 6.x temporarily and then to 7.0 within a 30 day time frame this summer. We're a large university and we had very few users on WiFi during that time.
The Macintosh laptops are having nothing but trouble since school began, and I have gone over everything and found that band select is turned on as well as load balancing. Since band select didn't exist in 5.2 (I believe) I know it wasn't on. As for load balancing, I don't believe it was on, and I discovered it was turned on when recently reviewing our configs.
The Macintosh laptops have been debugged and our Mac gurus tell us they're getting a message that equates to "the AP is busy, or the AP is full". This leads me to believe that load balancing got turned on during the upgrade and we didn't notice, which caused the Macintoshes to have issues.
We don't have any VoWiFi clients so we don't have to support them, and we don't officially support smartphones, either.
I turned off load balancing and will see how it goes....
Thanks!

Mod_weblogic and load balancing algorithm

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for