Unequal load ditribution accross LWAPs

Hi,
I am very new to Cisco wireless solutions and there is an existing setup I took over at my new place and tring to get my head around how things working. It consists of WS-C3750G-24WS-S25 switch with integrated wireless controller and a number of AIR-LAP1242AG-A-K9 and AIR-LAP1142N-A-K9 accross the building, location aplience, wcs server etc.
The issue is that somehow clients are not distrubuted equally accross access points. For example, I have two access points (different models, if it makes any difference) which are couple feet apart from each other. During the day, one of the LWAP (AIR-LAP1242AG-A-K9) takes vast majority of wireless clients in the area (if not all), at the same time the next one (AIR-LAP1142N-A-K9) which is 10 feet (clear sight) away from the first "leader" have only few (or close to zero) clients. I checked with WCS system, APs are working on different channels (1 and 6). The result is that the AIR-LAP1242AG-A-K9 get congested with number of clients and traffic load affecting user wireless experience. All LWAP are mounted as "table top" if it makes any difference. The map is pretty accurate and AP are placed on the map at right spots. I am not sure if all walls etc. present on the map as I don't know was there any wireless spectrum planning done prior deploying the system.
I would really want to have a clue why the clients are not distributed equally, it happens across the building, with all access points to some extend. Is there is something that needs to be "tweaked" on the end-users' wireless laptops or inside WCS system itself. I would appreciate any tips and suggestions which could help me to identify direction where I would be able to find answers and solutions to my issue.
Thanks in advance.

Ok, here are some updates.
I've tried to reconfigure the controller from scratch and got some positive results. I have an area which is currently served with a number of AIR-LAP1142N-A-K9 access points, table-top mounted about 10-15 feet from each other, channes are 1,6,11 dynamically distributed. The thing is that once I replace any of this APs with AIR-LAP1242AG-A-K9 model it starts "attracting" many clients, resulting the same issue as before. For example, a client within 5 feet clear sight from AIR-LAP1142N-A-K9 somehow prefers AIR-LAP1242AG-A-K9 which is 20 feet away, all the way accross the area, behind the drywall, cubicles etc. I simply don't get it, does the AIR-LAP1242AG-A-K9 have a stronger signal or smth which results vast majority of clients choose it despite the distance? Does it mean that a wireless setup preferrably should have identical AP accross the served area to avoid observed unequal load distribution? Thanks.

Similar Messages

Unequal Load Balance on Etherchannel (L2/SW3400ME)

Hi, i have a problem with my L2 port-channel between 2 SW ME-3400-24TS-D (12.2(44)SE5), there is a unequal load balance and i don't know how to fixed. Should I change the load balance method?.
All four ports have the same config, except one (int fa0/1 on SW_2) that have this commands:
MAMANIVLN1P1IRA1#SH RUN INT FA0/1 | INC hold
hold-queue 4096 in
hold-queue 4096 out
Should i change this hold-queue config?
Here more outputs where you can see the diference, one link has 2mb and the other link has 60mb,, that's a big diference, i would like to know how to solve this:
SW_1#sh int fa0/9 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: !!!!!! HACIA SW_2 !!!!!
Queueing strategy: fifo
5 minute input rate 2088000 bits/sec, 2065 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 25000 bits/sec, 46 packets/sec
SW_1#sh int fa0/10 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: PORTCHANNEL10 HACIA SW_2
Queueing strategy: fifo
5 minute input rate 1905000 bits/sec, 1948 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 63348000 bits/sec, 6095 packets/sec
SW_2#sh int fa0/1 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: Hacia SW_1_Fa0/9
Queueing strategy: fifo
30 second input rate 27000 bits/sec, 48 packets/sec
30 second output rate 2385000 bits/sec, 1996 packets/sec
SW_2#sh int fa0/2 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: PORTCHANNEL10 HACIA SW_1
Queueing strategy: fifo
5 minute input rate 63567000 bits/sec, 6114 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 1935000 bits/sec, 1976 packets/sec
more outputs...
SW_1#sh etherchannel load-balance
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Configuration:
src-mac
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: Source MAC address
IPv4: Source MAC address
SW_2#sh etherchannel load-balance
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Configuration:
src-mac
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: Source MAC address
IPv4: Source MAC address
SW_1#SH MAC ADDress-table INTerface po10 | inc Total
Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 297
SW_2#SH MAC ADDress-table INTerface po10 | inc Total
Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 66
In advance thanks for the help.

Normally it will fairly well balance the traffic . There is no way to make sure each channel is exactly the same utilization wise . You can look at how it is load balanced and make a change from say mac to ip address if it looks like you aren't getting the balance you want . It would be very rare that you are going to fill one port on the channel without filling the rest almost the same .Exceptions would be if you most of your traffic is headed to one place like a certain server , even then if you used ip addresses in both directions as the load balance I think it would balance out pretty good. If it got to that point where one link was almost filled you would have to think about adding another port to the channel . This is a real good page http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk213/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094714.shtml

Unequal Load Balancing with EIGRP over 4 Wireless networks

We are trying to load-balance on 4 interfaces that have unequal bandwidths. The setup looks like this
8 Computers -> Empty Config Switch -> 3560 Router\Switch -> 4x Wireless Radios on different frequencies - networks -> 3560 Router\Switch->Empty Config Switch -> 8 Computers
We have EIGRP setup and the bandwidths defined, and the routes are showing proper share counts, but once we start adding traffic to the network, they all jump on one of the links. The config and everything looks right, its just not working. I have tried switching to different cef algorithms. Removed the vlans . I made them equal cost and they did the same thing. Its like EIGRP does not want to load balance.
When i did this config with static routes or as OSPF, it actually load balanced them, but I'm stuck with a 1:1 share ratio. If i could control the ratio, then that would be an acceptable solution.
Any ideas on what could be causing this?
Code:
Routing entry for 192.168.104.0/24
Known via "eigrp 10", distance 90, metric 13312, type internal
Redistributing via eigrp 10
Last update from 192.168.2.4 on Vlan2, 00:04:25 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 192.168.9.4, from 192.168.9.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan9
      Route metric is 51712, traffic share count is 31
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 50000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
    192.168.5.4, from 192.168.5.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan5
      Route metric is 13312, traffic share count is 120
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 200000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
    192.168.3.4, from 192.168.3.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan3
      Route metric is 26112, traffic share count is 61
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
    192.168.2.4, from 192.168.2.4, 00:04:25 ago, via Vlan2
      Route metric is 13312, traffic share count is 120
      Total delay is 20 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 200000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 1
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/1 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/2 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/3 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 17111000 bits/sec, 2545 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 13872000 bits/sec, 2251 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show int Fa 0/4 | inc packets/sec
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
3560_Switch_1#show ip cef exact-route 192.168.101.57 192.168.104.57
192.168.101.57 -> 192.168.104.57 => IP adj out of Vlan5, addr 192.168.5.4
Here is the config.
Code:
ip cef load-sharing algorithm universal 00123456
interface FastEthernet0/1
switchport access vlan 2
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface FastEthernet0/2
switchport access vlan 3
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface FastEthernet0/3
switchport access vlan 5
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface FastEthernet0/4
switchport access vlan 9
bandwidth 200000
delay 1
spanning-tree portfast
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description USER PORT
switchport access vlan 100
spanning-tree portfast
interface Vlan2
bandwidth 200000
ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan3
bandwidth 100000
ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan5
bandwidth 200000
ip address 192.168.5.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan9
bandwidth 50000
ip address 192.168.9.1 255.255.255.0
delay 1
interface Vlan100
description User Data
ip address 192.168.101.1 255.255.255.0
router eigrp 10
maximum-paths 8
variance 15
network 192.168.2.0
network 192.168.3.0
network 192.168.5.0
network 192.168.9.0
network 192.168.101.0

Yup, that was the first cef algorithm I had tried.   ip cef load-sharing algorithm include-ports source destination
I tried all of the different types.
Also, I was sending data trough iperf from 4 computers + 1 comp steaming video on one network to 5 computers on another network. In any case of source or destination, it should have switched over. The odds of it all going on Vlan 5 is ~ 0.6%   Restarting the router sometimes places it all on a different vlan, but in any case its all or nothing.

MPLS TE equal or unequal load balancing doesn't work?

Dear Sir!
I've two MPLS TE tunnels from one PE to another PE.
And there are traffic share count between them
(as tunnel mpls traffic-eng load-share command define).
But in real life all traffic from the same source to the same destination go through only one tunnel
(as CEF define - i.e. how sh ip cef exact-route says).
PEs are 3660 platforms with c3660-jk9o3s-mz.123-8.T
installed.
How can I correct this problem?
Best regards,
Maxim Denisov

Dear Sir!
I'm agree with you as MPLS TE tunnels are opened from PE to PE, so CEF does it work.
But if I open this tunnels from P to PE, ONLY ONE of this tunnels are used instead of load-sharing, if traffic go from one source (of site1 of VPN1) to the same destination (located at site2 of VPN1).
Why? Packet through P-devices swithes by labels, so I mean that CEF cannot does src-dst load sharing?
My problem are that I must to do load sharing between this two tunnels in the case above.
Q: How can I solve this problem?
Best regards,
Maxim Denisov

MPLS TE equal or unequal load balancing doesn't work? - step2

Previous question in thread:
Dear Sir!
I've two MPLS TE tunnels from one PE to another PE.
And there are traffic share count between them
(as tunnel mpls traffic-eng load-share command define).
But in real life all traffic from the same source to the same destination go through only one tunnel
(as CEF define - i.e. how sh ip cef exact-route says).
PEs are 3660 platforms with c3660-jk9o3s-mz.123-8.T
installed.
How can I correct this problem?
But this answer does not solved my issue:
hritter - Network Consulting Engineer, CISCO SYSTEMS, CCIE
Aug 4, 2004, 7:20am PST
This is expected behavior since CEF is used at the head end to perform label imposition. I wouldn't recommend changing the default bahavior to per=packet loadsharing since this could lead to of of sequence packets, which could lower the overall performance.
Hope this helps,
so my secound question:
Dear Sir!
I'm agree with you as MPLS TE tunnels are opened from PE to PE, so CEF does it work.
But if I open this tunnels from P to PE, ONLY ONE of this tunnels are used instead of load-sharing, if traffic go from one source (of site1 of VPN1) to the same destination (located at site2 of VPN1).
Why? Packet through P-devices swithes by labels, so I mean that CEF cannot does src-dst load sharing?
My problem are that I must to do load sharing between this two tunnels in the case above.
Q: How can I solve this problem?
Best regards,
Maxim Denisov

The per session load-balancing is also used by MPLS when multiple paths are available. Changing this behavior to per-packet is still not recommended.
Hope this helps,

Dual ISP connection unequal load balancing

Hi All,
I an issue regarding load balancing between to ISP. I have done policy based routing as stated in other cisco discussions .
I have 2 /30 as my test ISP and isp ip configured on other switch while i have my customer configs on my end. I can ping the two test ISP from my router but not with PC's in the lan until i remove "ip nat inside source route-map 20 interface GigabitEthernet0/0.20 overload" from the routers config.
.. Please help
Load-Balancing-Router#show run
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 2716 bytes
! Last configuration change at 04:09:37 UTC Tue Apr 21 2015 by anprasad
version 15.0
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
no service password-encryption
hostname Load-Balancing-Router
boot-start-marker
boot-end-marker
no aaa new-model
no ipv6 cef
ip source-route
ip cef
ip dhcp excluded-address 192.168.1.2
ip dhcp excluded-address 192.168.1.0 192.168.1.100
ip dhcp pool LAN
network 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0
default-router 192.168.1.1
ip domain name fnu.ac.fj
multilink bundle-name authenticated
license udi pid CISCO1921/K9 sn FGL150925YE
username anprasad privilege 15 secret 5 $1$Oy40$h13lWAN4upzI19L6/MXjf/
username aaa privilege 15 secret 5 $1$W3JH$LMd0LUtdxJlXXJkB.NxjB0
ip ssh version 1
class-map match-all 512K-Outbound
match access-group name DR-512K-OutBound
class-map match-all 10240K-Outbound
match access-group name DR-1024K-OutBound
policy-map DR-Outbound
class 10240K-Outbound
police rate 10240000 bps burst 1920000 bytes
conform-action transmit
exceed-action drop
class 512K-Outbound
police rate 512000 bps burst 96000 bytes
conform-action transmit
exceed-action drop
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
no ip address
duplex auto
speed auto
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.10
description Student-Internet
encapsulation dot1Q 10
ip address 202.0.1.1 255.255.255.252
ip nat outside
ip virtual-reassembly
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.20
description Staff-Internet
encapsulation dot1Q 20
ip address 202.0.2.1 255.255.255.252
ip nat outside
ip virtual-reassembly
shutdown
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description LAN-Network
ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside
ip virtual-reassembly
duplex auto
speed auto
interface FastEthernet0/0/0
no ip address
shutdown
duplex auto
speed auto
ip forward-protocol nd
no ip http server
no ip http secure-server
ip nat inside source route-map 10 interface GigabitEthernet0/0.10 overload
ip nat inside source route-map 20 interface GigabitEthernet0/0.20 overload
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 202.0.1.2
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 202.0.2.2
ip access-list extended DR-10240K-OutBound
permit ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any
ip access-list extended DR-512K-OutBound
permit ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any
access-list 100 permit ip 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 any
route-map 10 permit 10
match ip address 100
match interface GigabitEthernet0/0.10
route-map 20 permit 20
match ip address 100
match interface GigabitEthernet0/0.20
snmp-server community fnuro RO
control-plane
line con 0
logging synchronous
login local
line aux 0
line vty 0 4
login local
scheduler allocate 20000 1000
end

Hi,
I would like to ask if you are done with your configuration? Is it working?
next month we will add an addition ISP and I will try to configure it?
Hope you'll give me some ideas.
thank you

Monitor LWAP Interface Load with SNMP

I am working on a monitoring system for the WLC. Most of the SNMP objects are fairly easy to understand but I can't find anything that will let us monitor the Ethernet interface load on a LWAP.
We can see the data in the WLC web interface by navigating to All APs > AP Name > Interfaces.
I would have expected to find something in this section of the tree:
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/SNMP/do/BrowseOID.do?local=en&translate=Translate&objectInput=1.3.6.1.4.1.14179.2.2#oidContent
Any help you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

Naturally I found my own answer a few minutes later:
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/SNMP/do/BrowseOID.do?local=en&translate=Translate&objectInput=1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.513.1.2.2.1#oidContent

Load-balancing in MPLS Core

How is load-balancing achieved in MPLS L3 vpns and equal cost multiple links exist to reach egress PE along with per-destination load-balancing enabled on interfaces.
I have tried to simulate the network below
Ingress PE--->P1--->>P2--->Egress PE
Multiple equal cost links exist between P1 and P2, cisco platform,LDP, IGP-ospf being used.

Hi,
Destination based load balancing in MPLS L3VPNs can be categorized into two scenarios:
1) multiple pathes between two PE routers
2) multiple access links to a single CE or site
Your question as I understand it was about the first scenario. So let me first quickly review how customer traffic is forwarded between VRFs on two different PE routers.
The VRF routing table will have BGP entries for the routes learned from the remote PE usually with next hop addresses being the remote PE loopback IP used for PE-to-PE BGP peering.
The traffic will be forwarded across P routers using the label for the BGP next hop.
Thus the load balancing accross the MPLS core in a first step is decided by the IGP, which has to insert several equal cost pathes into the global routing table for the BGP next hop networks (PE loopbacks).
Side note: MPLS traffic engineering in the core would allow for unequal cost load balancing.
The decision, which labeled packet to send across which path in the core is done by CEF using a hash algorithm. To achieve the same load balancing as with unlabeled IP traffic, a Cisco MPLS enabled router will look for the bottom label - the one with bottom-of-stack bit set to 1 - and try to determine, if the transported packet behind the bottom label is IP. If so, the hash is calculated for the customer IP header like for normal IP traffic. This ensures all traffic for a certain customer destination will always go through the same path. No unwanted packet reordering will occur.
Be aware, that the customer IP packet header will only be used for CEF hash calculation, no IP lookup will be performed, as core routers in MPLS L3VPNs do not have any knowledge about customer addresses.
As a side note: if the traffic transported is not IP (e.g. Ethernet over MPLS), the bottom label will be used for the CEF load balancing (e.g. the VC label).
For the second scenario - CE load balancing with multihomed CE/sites - it is first required to have two equal cost entries in the VRF routing tables. The difference will be the two different PE BGP next hop addresses. The first load balancing decision is the performed by CEF based on the IP packet received by the CE and the VRF routing table entries. Once CEF decided, which VRF entry to use, the required BGP next hop label (and the VPN label) is applied and the packet is transported across the MPLS core. load balancing there is done as described above.
Hope this helps! Please rate all posts.
Regards, Martin

Load Balancing Statistics

We have a CSS 11050. We mostly use it for load balancing accross multiple web servers. What is the command to see some statistics on how much traffic is sent to each one of the web servers? (Number of bytes, connections...)

You can do a 'show summary' to see the number of connections that have been sent to each servers.
You can't see the number of bytes so.
I would suggest to collect this info on the server.
Regards,
Gilles.

Load balancing with use of router 881.

Hello,
I have two MPLS line and i want load balancing with the help of CISCO router 881. is it necessary that i require two router on both location.? if one location have firewall and one location have cisco router 881 then can i do a load balancing or i require two router each on both location ? What are the basic requirement that i need.
Thanks,
Kuntal

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
An 881 should be able to load share across multiple ports. Many routing protocol support ECMP, including BGP, but you need "special" hidden/secret commands to enable. EIGRP also supports unequal cost load sharing.
If an 881 supports OER or PfR, those too will do unequal load sharing, dynamically.

ACE load balancing issue

Hi,
I have ACE module and 2 servers the problem i am facing is only one server is been serviced by ACE the other server is not getting much traffic at all.
One server gets hit most of the time like 3 pkts goes to server 1 and 1 pkt goes to server 2.
Could anyone tell me why is this issue that unequal load balancing is occoring on my device.
Thanks in advance.

here's the output of
sh serverfarm det
serverfarm : DNS, type: HOST
total rservers : 2
active rservers: 2
description : -
state : ACTIVE
predictor : ROUNDROBIN
failaction : -
back-inservice : 0
partial-threshold : 0
num times failover : 0
num times back inservice : 0
total conn-dropcount : 0
Probe(s) :
DNS_PROBE, type = DNS
----------connections-----------
real weight state current total failures
---+---------------------+------+------------+----------+----------+---------
rserver: DNS-118-1
10.0.0.1:0 8 OPERATIONAL 206 127901 1
max-conns : - , out-of-rotation count : -
min-conns : -
conn-rate-limit : - , out-of-rotation count : -
bandwidth-rate-limit : - , out-of-rotation count : -
retcode out-of-rotation count : -
load value : 0
rserver: DNS-118-2
10.0.0.2:0 8 OPERATIONAL 230 212332 4
max-conns : - , out-of-rotation count : -
min-conns : -
conn-rate-limit : - , out-of-rotation count : -
bandwidth-rate-limit : - , out-of-rotation count : -
retcode out-of-rotation count : -
load value : 0
here's the output of
sh service-policy L3L4_LOADB detail
Status : ACTIVE
Description: -----------------------------------------
Context Global Policy:
service-policy: L3L4_LOADB
class: CLASS_MAP
nat:
nat dynamic 1 vlan 118
curr conns : 325 , hit count : 340457
dropped conns : 5
client pkt count : 2697687 , client byte count: 179735431
server pkt count : 2694477 , server byte count: 535957631
conn-rate-limit : 0 , drop-count : 0
bandwidth-rate-limit : 0 , drop-count : 0
VIP Address: Protocol: Port:
10.0.0.3 tcp eq 53
10.0.0.3 udp eq 53
loadbalance:
L7 loadbalance policy: L7_LOADB
VIP Route Metric : 77
VIP Route Advertise : ENABLED-WHEN-ACTIVE
VIP ICMP Reply : ENABLED-WHEN-ACTIVE
VIP State: INSERVICE
curr conns : 325 , hit count : 340462
dropped conns : 5
client pkt count : 2697687 , client byte count: 179735431
server pkt count : 2694477 , server byte count: 535957631
conn-rate-limit : 0 , drop-count : 0
bandwidth-rate-limit : 0 , drop-count : 0
L7 Loadbalance policy : L7_LOADB
class/match : class-default
LB action: :
primary serverfarm: DNS
state: UP
backup serverfarm : -
hit count : 340457
dropped conns : 0

BI Load Balancing issue after support pack up grade

Hi BI Basis Gurus,
Before Upgrade :
System Info: SAP_BW   -700 0014 SAPKW70014 SAP NetWeaver BI 7.0
Self Load from DSO to DSO & DSO to InfoProvider: Always use to kick 15 to 17 TRFCs
Application Servers: 3
Load balancing : accross the 3 was good.
Data load time: around 1.5hrs per 13million records
After Upgrade :
System Info: SAP_BW   -700 0019 SAPKW70019 SAP NetWeaver BI 7.0
Self Load from DSO to DSO & DSO to InfoProvider: Now it is kicking only 2 TRFCs
Application Servers: 3
Load balancing : accross the 3 was poor.
Data load time: around 3.5hrs per 13million records
We validated / modified all the settings in the following TCODEs:
SMQS , SM59, RZ12, SBIW & SPRO
Still the system is not able to kick off more TRFCs .
The servers has 30 max conn. Please let us know if anybody has any suggestion as of today we had discussed with 4-5 basis guys & have no result till now.
Thanks
Edited by: umesh manoor on Aug 27, 2009 10:12 PM

We checked the required TCODEs:
1. RSODSO_SETTINGS
     the parallel process for activation : 6
But this is not causing any issue as the activation time is same before & after sp upgrade.
2. RZ12
Logon Group   Instance
Default               Ins1
Default               Ins2
Default               Ins3
Please let us know if you have any suggestion.
Thanks

Load balancing jpdk portlets

We want to load balance our application across two physical application servers that have 9iAS installed. The components of 9iAS are:
OHS (apache web server)
iFS 1.1.9.0.7
Discoverer
Reports Server
OC4J ( which hosts our intranet application)
JPDK (provides two portlet that display a user menu and a content page)
Both machines will be identically set up to
a) distribute load
b) provide fault tolerance.
Here is where we face a challenge.
The two portlets (menu and content) on each of the application servers point to their own 9iAS components mentioned above.
We want to load balance accross the apache servers and once a session in portal has been established bind to the server machine that served the single sign-on login for the rest of the application.
Our problem is that the portal page that contains the menu and content portlet is statically bound to a portlet that is served from a web provider. We need to have the portal pick up the portlet from either of the server m/c and from then on always go to that particular server m/c for the life of that session (which is a portal login session).

We want to load balance our application across two physical application servers that have 9iAS installed. The components of 9iAS are:
OHS (apache web server)
iFS 1.1.9.0.7
Discoverer
Reports Server
OC4J ( which hosts our intranet application)
JPDK (provides two portlet that display a user menu and a content page)
Both machines will be identically set up to
a) distribute load
b) provide fault tolerance.
Here is where we face a challenge.
The two portlets (menu and content) on each of the application servers point to their own 9iAS components mentioned above.
We want to load balance accross the apache servers and once a session in portal has been established bind to the server machine that served the single sign-on login for the rest of the application.
Our problem is that the portal page that contains the menu and content portlet is statically bound to a portlet that is served from a web provider. We need to have the portal pick up the portlet from either of the server m/c and from then on always go to that particular server m/c for the life of that session (which is a portal login session).

BI Load Balancing issue after support pack up grade ( 14 -- 19)

Hi BI Basis Gurus,
Before Upgrade :
System Info: SAP_BW -700 0014 SAPKW70014 SAP NetWeaver BI 7.0
Self Load from DSO to DSO & DSO to InfoProvider: Always use to kick 15 to 17 TRFCs
Application Servers: 3
Load balancing : accross the 3 was good.
Data load time: around 1.5hrs per 13million records
After Upgrade :
System Info: SAP_BW -700 0019 SAPKW70019 SAP NetWeaver BI 7.0
Self Load from DSO to DSO & DSO to InfoProvider: Now it is kicking only 2 TRFCs
Application Servers: 3
Load balancing : accross the 3 was poor.
Data load time: around 3.5hrs per 13million records
We validated / modified all the settings in the following TCODEs:
SMQS , SM59, RZ12, SBIW & SPRO
Still the system is not able to kick off more TRFCs .
The servers has 30 max conn. Please let us know if anybody has any suggestion as of today we had discussed with 4-5 basis guys & have no result till now.
Thanks

Can you try no of parallel processing option in DTP Overview which may help you in kicking of parallel processing between ODS to ODS load.
Thanks,
Arun

BGP LOAD BALANCING

BGP chooses only a single best path to reach a specific destination. BGP is not designed to perform load balancing..
what i learned from every doc... but suppose this two ebgp neighbor have multiple path, creating neighborship by using loopback ip, to reach loopback router have 2 equal cost igp routes...in that case after recursive lookup router will load balance the traffic ...
Plzzz let me know am i right... or what is the meaning of this statement :
At one side it is said bgp is not made for load balancing specially in ccna, ccnp other exam books, but after doing google found following link, saying load balancing/load sharing can be done.... Why this confusion...
http://ccieblog.co.uk/bgp/bgp-unequal-load-cost-sharing
Please tell me what is truth...

Milan,
link will help me lot...
but...
The maximum-paths command for BGP works if your router has multiple parallel paths to different routers in the same remote AS; this command affects only the number of routes kept in the IP routing table, not the number of paths selected as best by BGP. For BGP, the paths parameter defaults to one.
Suppose R1 have 2 paths to reach any destination; Without the maximum-paths command under the router bgp, there is only one path in R1’s routing table. After the maximum-paths 2 command is added to the R1 BGP configuration, both paths appear in the IP routing table, However, only one path is still selected as the best in the BGP table.
Vasilii & Reza,
means what is right statement for bgp load balancing ....or is it changed case to case..?? please clear me...
Guies ...can you also tell me bgp support for "load balancing" & "load sharing"???

Unequal load ditribution accross LWAPs

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for