Re: [load balancing] Weighted Least Connections Algorithm

From: Allan Liska (
Date: Mon Feb 04 2002 - 14:41:53 EST

  • Next message: Daniel Peterson: "Re: [load balancing] Weighted Least Connections Algorithm"


    You did not indicate which platform you were doing load balancing on, but
    I think the general answer to your question is that when the new servers
    are added into the rotation, new sessions will be slowly added to litl-1
    and litl-2. So they will not get all the new sessions, but be brought
    into the rotation gradually.


    On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Casassa, Nathan wrote:

    > Here is the scenario:
    > Current algorithm is leastconns, with 2 servers weighted equally with 1.
    > Both servers have 100 sessions per, totaling 200 sessions. We will call them
    > Big-1 and Big-2.
    > With the addition of two smaller servers into the SLB group (called Litl-1
    > and Litl-2) using the "weighted leastconns algorithm" by changing Big-1 and
    > Big-2 to a weight of 3 and leaving Litl-1 and Litl-2 as 1, we will
    > effectively give 1 out of 3 connections to Litl-1 or Litl-2. The question
    > is, when these weights are applied with existing sessions, will the
    > algorithm be dynamically changed causing all new sequential sessions to be
    > sent to Litl-1 and Litl-2 until they both have approx 33 customers each (not
    > sending any sessions to Big-1 or Big-2 until Litl-1 and Litl-2 are balanced)
    > before it starts sending additional connections to Big-1 and Big-2, or will
    > the switch spread new connections across all 4 servers until a balance
    > occurs between all of them.
    > Does that make sense?
    > nate

    Allan Liska

    ____________________ The Load Balancing Mailing List Unsubscribe: Archive: LBDigest: MRTG with SLB: Hosted by:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Feb 04 2002 - 14:58:57 EST