Is the load balancing of the consumer node via Virtual proxy enough?

[jpjust]

All,

I have an qliksense consumer node configuration question.

I have an central node active, central node passive and 2 consumer node.

How can I ensure if one of the consumer node goes down and users will be redirected to the second consumer node with out any interruption? Load balancing the consumer node on Virtual proxy configuration in qmc is enough?

Thanks

[Maria_Halley]

@jpjust 

I assuming that both consumer nodes are load balanced today. 

Then if one goes down Sense will see the node offline and send all user requests to the other node

Here are some links to help pages about this

https://help.qlik.com/en-US/sense-admin/May2021/Subsystems/DeployAdministerQSE/Content/Sense_DeployA...

https://help.qlik.com/en-US/sense-admin/May2021/Subsystems/DeployAdministerQSE/Content/Sense_DeployA...

[rohitk1609 · Accepted solution]

@jpjust If one consumer node goes down, the other node can't take or bring all users to itself.  You should use network load balancer here. NLB, keep checking which server is offline and if it founds offline, it pulls out from the list of servers where traffic is going. 

This switch of users can't be possible by Qlik itself.

If a post helps to resolve your issue, please mark the appropriate replies as "Accept as Solution" or Like it.

Reach out to me at kumar.rohit1609@gmail.com if there is need of any clarification or assistance

Connect with me on LinkedIn  Linked In Contact 

To get latest updates and articles, join Qlik community at https://www.facebook.com/QlikIntellectuals

Best,
Rohit

[Maria_Halley]

If the load balancing is set up to load balance between the node already, I don't see it wouldn't work if one goes down. (Same url). QlikSense should know that one engine node is down and load balance it to the other node only.

If the system is NOT set up to load balance before (separate URLs), then it wont switch over.

[rohitk1609]

Load balance works between engine services and you are talking about proxy. If one node is down and your user land to the down node, he wil get error.

[Maria_Halley]

I am talking about the simple load balancing in QS. But maybe I misunderstood the question. 

From the help

When you install multiple engines and virtual proxies, you must add load balancing to the new nodes and virtual proxies. It is only on the central node that load balancing is automatically added. If you create a node without configuring the virtual proxy, the node will never actually be used. If you create a new virtual proxy, you must configure it by adding load balancing and selecting which nodes that the virtual proxy can forward work to.

The default algorithm used for load balancing is round-robin, where the load is evenly distributed between the available nodes on the multi-node site. However, any subsequent sessions from the same user/client will open on the current engine node, instead of following the round-robin.

[jpjust]

Thank you so much for the informations.

One thing I am still not clear is.

I have one central node / one passive node / 2 consumer node

If users wants to access the hub to open an APP, what dictates to hit the consumer node? Assuming I have virtual proxies configured and respective services are running on each node. 

If user hits https://qliksense.server.com. How does qliksense knows to route the user traffic to consumer node to display the app?

Thanks

[Maria_Halley · Accepted solution]

If  https://qliksense.server.com. is the URL to the Central node and you have added the other nodes in the virtual proxy under the load balancing section, the below should be true

The default algorithm used for load balancing is round-robin, where the load is evenly distributed between the available nodes on the multi-node site. However, any subsequent sessions from the same user/client will open on the current engine node, instead of following the round-robin.

You can also add more detailed load balancing nodes. I already added a link in previous post to that.

But for more complex systems @rohitk1609 s approach might be better.