Load balancing and clustering

When a web application becomes overloaded with traffic, one can offload it
by load balancing and clustering the front end web servers. What happens
when the back-end MSSQL database becomes overloaded? Does MYSQL offer load
balancing and clustering?"Shabam" <info@.pcconnect.net> wrote in message
news:U4ydnZzBnMTWcO_dRVn-tA@.adelphia.com...
> When a web application becomes overloaded with traffic, one can offload it
> by load balancing and clustering the front end web servers. What happens
> when the back-end MSSQL database becomes overloaded? Does MYSQL offer
load
> balancing and clustering?

I'm not sure if you're talking about MSSQL (Microsoft SQL Server) or MySQL.
In the case of MSSQL, clustering is supported for failover only, not for
load-balancing. If you need load-balancing, then it can be implemented in a
middle-tier.

Simon|||> I'm not sure if you're talking about MSSQL (Microsoft SQL Server) or
MySQL.
> In the case of MSSQL, clustering is supported for failover only, not for
> load-balancing. If you need load-balancing, then it can be implemented in
a
> middle-tier.

What do you mean middle tier?|||"Shabam" <info@.pcconnect.net> wrote in message news:<9oKdnTRxs9oRou7dRVn-uQ@.adelphia.com>...
> > I'm not sure if you're talking about MSSQL (Microsoft SQL Server) or
> MySQL.
> > In the case of MSSQL, clustering is supported for failover only, not for
> > load-balancing. If you need load-balancing, then it can be implemented in
> a
> > middle-tier.
> What do you mean middle tier?

I mean an application server, such as WebSphere, WebLogic, Microsoft
Transaction Server etc., which sits between the web server and the
database server. Clients connect to the application server, which
manages all the database connections, so you can use the application
server to spread database access across several physical databases.

Simonsql

load balancing & sql ?

can you use load balancing with a server running SQL server 2000 standard
edition ?
i.e is traffic balanced correctly ?
(sorry if its a silly question - i just need to be sure).
ScottIn the context of SQL Server, the question just doesn't make sense.
What are you 'load balancing'?
Load balancing is normally intended to direct traffic to one of multiple
servers -typically web servers. I would think that having a database in
multiple servers would create problems with data consistency, etc.
Perhaps if you told us a little more about what you are attempting to
accomplish, we can help direct you to the correct information.
Arnie Rowland
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"scott" <aintnowspamhere@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ePoYZryrGHA.4884@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> can you use load balancing with a server running SQL server 2000 standard
> edition ?
> i.e is traffic balanced correctly ?
> (sorry if its a silly question - i just need to be sure).
> Scott
>|||thanks for reply.
I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
for 30 users.
Scott|||scott wrote:
> thanks for reply.
> I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard editio
n
> for 30 users.
> Scott
>
>
There shouldn't be any problems in having 2 network cards in the server,
but I doubt it will make any difference. In terms of load and
performance, it's in my opinion never the network cards that causes any
bottleneck. It's your disk system and your CPU/Memory that affects
performance.
Regards
Steen Schlter Persson
Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator|||...and bad SQL(locking/blocking) :-)
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:

> scott wrote:
> There shouldn't be any problems in having 2 network cards in the server,
> but I doubt it will make any difference. In terms of load and
> performance, it's in my opinion never the network cards that causes any
> bottleneck. It's your disk system and your CPU/Memory that affects
> performance.
>
> --
> Regards
> Steen Schlüter Persson
> Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator
>|||I can't imagine that you have a server for 30 users where a single GB NIC
will be 'overloaded', so the second one is mostly providing a 'safety net'.
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"scott" <aintnowspamhere@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23N1GXG8rGHA.4004@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> thanks for reply.
> I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard
> edition for 30 users.
> Scott
>|||excellent thanks for the replies
Scott

load balancing & sql ?

can you use load balancing with a server running SQL server 2000 standard
edition ?
i.e is traffic balanced correctly ?
(sorry if its a silly question - i just need to be sure).
ScottIn the context of SQL Server, the question just doesn't make sense.
What are you 'load balancing'?
Load balancing is normally intended to direct traffic to one of multiple
servers -typically web servers. I would think that having a database in
multiple servers would create problems with data consistency, etc.
Perhaps if you told us a little more about what you are attempting to
accomplish, we can help direct you to the correct information.
--
Arnie Rowland
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"scott" <aintnowspamhere@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ePoYZryrGHA.4884@.TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> can you use load balancing with a server running SQL server 2000 standard
> edition ?
> i.e is traffic balanced correctly ?
> (sorry if its a silly question - i just need to be sure).
> Scott
>|||thanks for reply.
I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
for 30 users.
Scott|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--050204090900090208000009
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
scott wrote:
> thanks for reply.
> I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
> for 30 users.
> Scott
>
>
There shouldn't be any problems in having 2 network cards in the server,
but I doubt it will make any difference. In terms of load and
performance, it's in my opinion never the network cards that causes any
bottleneck. It's your disk system and your CPU/Memory that affects
performance.
Regards
Steen Schlüter Persson
Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator
--050204090900090208000009
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
scott wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid%23N1GXG8rGHA.4004@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">thanks for reply.
I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
for 30 users.
Scott
</pre>
</blockquote>
<font size="-1"><font face="Arial">There shouldn't be any problems in
having 2 network cards in the server, but I doubt it will make any
difference. In terms of load and performance, it's in my opinion never
the network cards that causes any bottleneck. It's your disk system and
your CPU/Memory that affects performance. <br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Regards<br>
Steen Schlüter Persson<br>
Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator<br>
</font></font>
</body>
</html>
--050204090900090208000009--|||...and bad SQL(locking/blocking) :-)
"Steen Persson (DK)" wrote:
> scott wrote:
> > thanks for reply.
> >
> > I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> > gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard edition
> > for 30 users.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> >
> There shouldn't be any problems in having 2 network cards in the server,
> but I doubt it will make any difference. In terms of load and
> performance, it's in my opinion never the network cards that causes any
> bottleneck. It's your disk system and your CPU/Memory that affects
> performance.
>
> --
> Regards
> Steen Schlüter Persson
> Databaseadministrator / Systemadministrator
>|||I can't imagine that you have a server for 30 users where a single GB NIC
will be 'overloaded', so the second one is mostly providing a 'safety net'.
--
Arnie Rowland, Ph.D.
Westwood Consulting, Inc
Most good judgment comes from experience.
Most experience comes from bad judgment.
- Anonymous
"scott" <aintnowspamhere@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%23N1GXG8rGHA.4004@.TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> thanks for reply.
> I should have explained more sorry. I simply meant in the context of two
> gigabit network cards in a server running sbs 2003 and sql standard
> edition for 30 users.
> Scott
>|||excellent thanks for the replies
Scott

Load Balancing

Hi,
In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql
servers?
And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers
so they will both serve the same data.
I hope someone has an answer for me.
Thanks in advance.
Floris
SQL Server does not support load balancing of the databases with NLB.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.itsummitseries.com/experts/fournier.htm - Cluster Summit
"Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message
news:OyIKCVSjFHA.1148@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
> Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
> I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
> with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our
> sql servers?
> And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql
> servers so they will both serve the same data.
> I hope someone has an answer for me.
> Thanks in advance.
> Floris
>
sql

Load Balancing

Hi,
In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql
servers?
And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers
so they will both serve the same data.
I hope someone has an answer for me.
Thanks in advance.
Floris
Load balancing when you own data (like a DBMS does) and you also want to modify that data is far
from trivial.
I don't think any system does that transparently (you either use shared disk, where you till only
have one copy of data or you do shared nothing where you only have a set of data on one location).
First determine what modifications are to be performed. Easiest is of you can separate read-only
applications (reports etc). If so, you can replicate (using built-in transactional replication) from
the server where you do modifications to the read-only server.
If you cannot separate read-only applications, you can look into merge replication. However, if you
modify the same data at the same time on two nodes, one will win and the other modification will be
lost. Unacceptable in many scenarios.
I suggest you read up in Books Online about Replication (there are different types of replications)
as well as "federated servers" (also known as distributed partitioned views).
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message news:eEpmKVSjFHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
> Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
> I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available with Windows Server
> 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql servers?
> And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers so they will both
> serve the same data.
> I hope someone has an answer for me.
> Thanks in advance.
> Floris
>
|||Thanks!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:uMficaSjFHA.2180@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Load balancing when you own data (like a DBMS does) and you also want to
> modify that data is far from trivial.
> I don't think any system does that transparently (you either use shared
> disk, where you till only have one copy of data or you do shared nothing
> where you only have a set of data on one location).
> First determine what modifications are to be performed. Easiest is of you
> can separate read-only applications (reports etc). If so, you can
> replicate (using built-in transactional replication) from the server where
> you do modifications to the read-only server.
> If you cannot separate read-only applications, you can look into merge
> replication. However, if you modify the same data at the same time on two
> nodes, one will win and the other modification will be lost. Unacceptable
> in many scenarios.
> I suggest you read up in Books Online about Replication (there are
> different types of replications) as well as "federated servers" (also
> known as distributed partitioned views).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message
> news:eEpmKVSjFHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>

Load Balancing

Hi,
In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql
servers?
And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers
so they will both serve the same data.
I hope someone has an answer for me.
Thanks in advance.
FlorisLoad balancing when you own data (like a DBMS does) and you also want to modify that data is far
from trivial.
I don't think any system does that transparently (you either use shared disk, where you till only
have one copy of data or you do shared nothing where you only have a set of data on one location).
First determine what modifications are to be performed. Easiest is of you can separate read-only
applications (reports etc). If so, you can replicate (using built-in transactional replication) from
the server where you do modifications to the read-only server.
If you cannot separate read-only applications, you can look into merge replication. However, if you
modify the same data at the same time on two nodes, one will win and the other modification will be
lost. Unacceptable in many scenarios.
I suggest you read up in Books Online about Replication (there are different types of replications)
as well as "federated servers" (also known as distributed partitioned views).
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message news:eEpmKVSjFHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
> Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
> I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available with Windows Server
> 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql servers?
> And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers so they will both
> serve the same data.
> I hope someone has an answer for me.
> Thanks in advance.
> Floris
>|||Thanks!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:uMficaSjFHA.2180@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Load balancing when you own data (like a DBMS does) and you also want to
> modify that data is far from trivial.
> I don't think any system does that transparently (you either use shared
> disk, where you till only have one copy of data or you do shared nothing
> where you only have a set of data on one location).
> First determine what modifications are to be performed. Easiest is of you
> can separate read-only applications (reports etc). If so, you can
> replicate (using built-in transactional replication) from the server where
> you do modifications to the read-only server.
> If you cannot separate read-only applications, you can look into merge
> replication. However, if you modify the same data at the same time on two
> nodes, one will win and the other modification will be lost. Unacceptable
> in many scenarios.
> I suggest you read up in Books Online about Replication (there are
> different types of replications) as well as "federated servers" (also
> known as distributed partitioned views).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message
> news:eEpmKVSjFHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Hi,
>> In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
>> Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
>> I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only
>> available with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
>> So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our
>> sql servers?
>> And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql
>> servers so they will both serve the same data.
>> I hope someone has an answer for me.
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Floris
>sql

Load Balancing

Hi,
In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql
servers?
And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers
so they will both serve the same data.
I hope someone has an answer for me.
Thanks in advance.
FlorisLoad balancing when you own data (like a DBMS does) and you also want to mod
ify that data is far
from trivial.
I don't think any system does that transparently (you either use shared disk
, where you till only
have one copy of data or you do shared nothing where you only have a set of
data on one location).
First determine what modifications are to be performed. Easiest is of you ca
n separate read-only
applications (reports etc). If so, you can replicate (using built-in transac
tional replication) from
the server where you do modifications to the read-only server.
If you cannot separate read-only applications, you can look into merge repli
cation. However, if you
modify the same data at the same time on two nodes, one will win and the oth
er modification will be
lost. Unacceptable in many scenarios.
I suggest you read up in Books Online about Replication (there are different
types of replications)
as well as "federated servers" (also known as distributed partitioned views)
.
--
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
"Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message news:eEpmKVSjFHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx
.gbl...
> Hi,
> In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
> Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
> I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
with Windows Server
> 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sq
l servers?
> And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql server
s so they will both
> serve the same data.
> I hope someone has an answer for me.
> Thanks in advance.
> Floris
>|||Thanks!
"Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@.hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
message news:uMficaSjFHA.2180@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Load balancing when you own data (like a DBMS does) and you also want to
> modify that data is far from trivial.
> I don't think any system does that transparently (you either use shared
> disk, where you till only have one copy of data or you do shared nothing
> where you only have a set of data on one location).
> First determine what modifications are to be performed. Easiest is of you
> can separate read-only applications (reports etc). If so, you can
> replicate (using built-in transactional replication) from the server where
> you do modifications to the read-only server.
> If you cannot separate read-only applications, you can look into merge
> replication. However, if you modify the same data at the same time on two
> nodes, one will win and the other modification will be lost. Unacceptable
> in many scenarios.
> I suggest you read up in Books Online about Replication (there are
> different types of replications) as well as "federated servers" (also
> known as distributed partitioned views).
> --
> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
> Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
>
> "Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message
> news:eEpmKVSjFHA.2472@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>

Load Balancing

Hi,
In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our sql
servers?
And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql servers
so they will both serve the same data.
I hope someone has an answer for me.
Thanks in advance.
Floris
No, SQL Server is not Load Balance aware. Even with clustering does not
provide Load Balancing.
You could have load balance your web servers, and have individual web
servers accessing different dedicated SQL Servers.
SQL Server 2005 does provide Peer to Peer replication which will keep a
group of SQL Servers aggregated for scale out read and write performance in
sync. But it does not provide load balancing, but a piece of the
functionality required by it.
Hilary Cotter
Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
http://www.indexserverfaq.com
"Floris" <meNOSPAM@.here_my_place.nl> wrote in message
news:OG3UGVSjFHA.2904@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi,
> In windows 2003 server you have NLB (Network Load Balancing).
> Can i use this to load balance my traffic to our sql server?
> I know you also have "Microsoft Cluster Service" but that's only available
> with Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition.
> So is it possible to load balance my traffic from our webservers to our
sql
> servers?
> And i will create a replication on the background between the 2 sql
servers
> so they will both serve the same data.
> I hope someone has an answer for me.
> Thanks in advance.
> Floris
>

Load Balancing

How much traffic/load can a database server running MS SQL server take
before it can't handle it anymore? And when that time comes, what are the
recourses? Am I able to load balance it between separate servers?Jibba Jabba wrote:
> How much traffic/load can a database server running MS SQL server take
> before it can't handle it anymore? And when that time comes, what are the
> recourses? Am I able to load balance it between separate servers?

Depends on the server hardware. And based on Microsoft's federated
architecture ... while you can offload to multiple servers ... you must
do a lot of duplication and mean time between failures goes down ...
not up.

If you get to the point that SQL Server can no longer handle the load
... you are most likely looking at Sybase, Informix, Oracle, DB2 or
waiting hopefully for some future version.

--
Daniel Morgan
damorgan@.x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)|||"Jibba Jabba" <dontemailme@.dontemailme.com> wrote in message news:<UsEWb.893$tL3.845@.newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net >...
> How much traffic/load can a database server running MS SQL server take
> before it can't handle it anymore? And when that time comes, what are the
> recourses? Am I able to load balance it between separate servers?

As with most performance-related questions, there's no simple answer.
If you have a well-designed application, and well-written code, then
the answer is 'a lot'. If you don't, then the answer is 'not a lot'.
The only way to get a real, quantifiable answer is for you to do some
load testing using your own code and data. In many cases, scaling up
the database server is pointless, because the application code is the
real bottleneck, but again, this is something that only you can
investigate properly.

Simon|||"Jibba Jabba" <dontemailme@.dontemailme.com> wrote in message
news:UsEWb.893$tL3.845@.newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> How much traffic/load can a database server running MS SQL server take
> before it can't handle it anymore? And when that time comes, what are the
> recourses? Am I able to load balance it between separate servers?

"It depends"

What type of load. How fast are your disks, your CPU, etc.

You can't do load-balancing per-se, but you can do various things that can
help.

We publish data to Box A and then push that to Boxes B and C and uses those
for reading. Works well.