General discussion

Locked

IIS load balancing

By daveywavey ·
I intend to load balance two Web servers, using Cisco Content switch fabric. Thus the cluster/load balanced platform is provided by the Network layer, rather than MS W2K Advanced OS. The two servers will have W2K Standard edition OS loaded.
My question is that to cluster/load balance applications that are cluster aware is fine, but can I cluster/load balance IIS on this platform, without the need for W2K Advanced? Since it is an application, I would expect the answer to be yes, but since it's an MS application that comes bundled with the OS, have they made it so that you need to buy W2K Advanced Server?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

5 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

IIS load balancing

by BeerMonster In reply to IIS load balancing

Hi,
Win2k advanced clustering uses network load balancing. All this does in essence is divide the traffic between the servers, it neither knows nor cares what happens to the traffic when it is passed up the network stack. This means that the ability to load balance correctly is required in the design of the application itself, rather than being managed by any load balancing component. For a web site, this typically means that both servers are capable of servicing client requests independantly from each other - which is usually the case anyway. There are two things to bear in mind. Firstly is session state - Network load balancing uses various algorithms to ensure that each incoming client always goes to the same server, bear in mind that a typical web transaction is not a permanent connection - rather it is a series of individual requests, each independant of the last (that's why you need cookies for example, this allows a web server to identify a particular request as belonging to an 'ongoing' session). It is important that your load balancing solution is capable of doing this too (I'd be surprised if it didn't). secondly, network load balancing (whether via cisco or win2k's nlb)is not application aware - this means that if the web service stops, clients will still be blindly sent to the failed server. typically nlb solutions will only stop sending requests to a machine if the machine goes off the network completely. Hope this helps...

Collapse -

IIS load balancing

by daveywavey In reply to IIS load balancing

Poster rated this answer

Collapse -

IIS load balancing

by LordInfidel In reply to IIS load balancing

Just expounding on beer monsters statements...

One of the critical differences between M$'s LB solution(Adv srvr w/clustering) is it's intelligent knowledge if IIS stops responding.

That is essentially the big plus for clustering IIS.

Wherecicso and other LB solutions (I personally use wsd pro from radware) operate at the network layer and only care if the machine is alive.

But if the machine is alive but IIS is not, then you will have problems.

So it's a tradeoff.

But if allyou are running are web servers on those machines and you can be damned sure that if the machine is up and reachable then IIS is running then cisco is fine.

If you are iffy about whether or not the site is going to be live/active and want it to automatically cut over, then M$ load balancing is the way to go.

I also personally use M$ cluster service for sql and found it to be quite reliable. (except when there is a netwk change which brings down an interface for no explainable reason, butthat is another story)

Collapse -

IIS load balancing

by daveywavey In reply to IIS load balancing

Poster rated this answer

Collapse -

IIS load balancing

by daveywavey In reply to IIS load balancing

This question was closed by the author

Back to Windows Forum
5 total posts (Page 1 of 1)  

Related Forums