As I said before load balancing is okey, the problem is with statistics. For example when you especialy look to the statistics with sh service summary and sh summary you see 4 persons on server 5 when you looked from server 5 there are 7 persons. This is the problem I am trying to tell. Although there are 7 persons connected to server 5 CSS show only 4 persons connected to server 5.
Best regards, ""Greene, Patrick"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > What are you balancing on? Have you configured the CSS to balance on > least connections because the default is round robin. These are your > load balancing options, Round Robin(default),Weighted Round Robin,Least > Connections/Bytes, and > ArrowPoint Content Aware (ACA). > > If you want to balance based on least connections, in the content rule > specify "balance leastconn" to balance based on connections. > > Sincerely, > Patrick J Greene > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cisco Breaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 3:26 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Terminal Server load balancing [7:44002] > > > Hi, > > We have implemented load balancing between 5 microsoft terminal servers. > The problem is when I looked at the second server I see 5 people > connected but from the CSS view there is only 2 people connected. We > tried this example with clearing counters on CSS and restarting all > terminal servers to make sure everyone disconnected. After that again we > check the statistics and nothing changed. For ex. Cisco shows 4 > Microsoft shows 8. > > All the statistic gathered by issuing sh service summary and sh summary > are not accurate as Microsoft Terminal Server Managers. > > What can be the problem? > > Any help will be appreciated? > > Best regards, Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44327&t=44002 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
