Method of load balancing across two or more servers in a computer network

• US 20040073639A1
• Filed: 09/06/2002
• Published: 04/15/2004
• Est. Priority Date: 09/06/2002
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Outblaze Ltd. (International Business Machines Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Outblaze Ltd. (International Business Machines Corporation)
• Inventors: Basoglu, Tony, Lee, Raymond Wai Man, Goolamabbas, Yusuf
• Application Number:
  US10/236,131
• Publication Number:
  US 20040073639A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/223
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/5083 Techniques for rebalancing the load in a distributed system

Abstract

A method of load balancing across two or more servers in a computer network includes determining the load on each server and formulating which, if any, groups of data stored on a server can be migrated between the file servers to balance the interaction load across them.

Claims

1. A method of balancing server interactions across two or more servers in a network including:

monitoring one or more types of server interaction across two or more servers and storing interaction data, and at one or more predetermined times;

analysing the interaction data to obtain an interaction score for each of the two or more servers,

comparing the interaction score for each of the two or more servers to interaction criteria and identifying any irregular servers in the two or more servers,

identifying one or more groups of data, if any, to be moved to or from the irregular servers to balance the server interactions, and

moving said groups of data.

2. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction and which of the two or more servers was involved in the interaction.

3. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction, and wherein analysing the interaction data includes assigning a weighting factor to the one or more types of server interaction and determining a sum of the weighting factors for the server interactions associated with each of the two or more servers, and wherein the interaction score is the SUM.

4. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein interaction criteria are a first preferred interaction score and a second preferred interaction score, the one or more irregular servers being one or more servers where the interaction score is below the first preferred interaction score or above the second preferred interaction score, and wherein the one or more groups of data are moved from the irregular servers having the interaction score above the second preferred interaction score to the irregular servers having the interaction score below the first preferred interaction score.

5. A method as claimed in claim 4 wherein the first preferred interaction score and the second preferred interaction score are dynamically determined using an average of the interaction scores of all of the two or more servers.

6. A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein the one or more groups of data are temporarily moved to a temporary storage location,

7. A method of balancing server interactions across two or more servers in a network, wherein interaction data relating to server interactions is recorded in one or more log files, the method including at one or more predetermined times:

analysing interaction data from one or more log files to obtain an interaction score for two or more servers in a network,

comparing the interaction score for each of the two or more servers to interaction criteria and is identifying any irregular servers in the two or more servers,

identifying one or more groups of data, if any, to be moved to or from the irregular servers to balance the server interactions, and

moving said groups of data.

8. A method as claimed in claim 7 including consolidating the one or more log files prior to analysing the interaction data.

9. A method as claimed in claim 7 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction and which of the two or more servers was involved in the interaction.

10. A method as claimed in claim 7 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction, and wherein analysing the interaction data includes assigning a weighting factor to the one or more types of server interaction and determining a sum of the weighting factors for the server interactions associated with each of the two or more servers, and wherein the interaction score is the sum.

11. A method as claimed in claim 7 wherein interaction is criteria are a first preferred interaction score and a second preferred interaction score, the one or more irregular servers being one or more servers where the interaction score is below the first preferred interaction score or above the second preferred interaction score, and wherein the one or more groups of data are moved from the irregular servers having the interaction score above the second preferred interaction score to the irregular servers having the interaction score below the first preferred interaction score.

12. A method as claimed in claim 11 wherein the first preferred interaction score and the second preferred interaction score are dynamically determined using an average of the interaction scores of all of the two or more servers.

13. A method as claimed in claim 7 wherein the one or more groups of data are temporarily moved to a temporary storage location.

14. A method of balancing server interactions across two or more file servers in a computer network, wherein the two or more file servers store information relating to a plurality of users, and wherein interaction data relating to server interactions is recorded in one or more log files, the method including at one or more predetermined times:

analysing interaction data from one or more log files to obtain an interaction score for two or more servers in a network,

manipulating the interaction scores for the two or more servers to identify any irregular servers in the two or more servers,

identifying information relating to one or more users to be moved to or from the irregular servers to balance the server interactions, and

moving the information relating to one or more users.

15. A method as claimed in claim 14 including consolidating the one or more log files prior to analysing the interaction data.

16. A method as claimed in claim 14 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction, and wherein analysing the interaction data includes assigning a weighting factor to the one or more types of server Interaction and determining a sum of the weighting factors for the server interactions associated with each of the two or more servers, and wherein the interaction score is the sum.

17. A method as claimed in claim 14 wherein manipulating the interaction scores for the two or more servers includes determining an average interaction score and determining relative deviations of the interaction scores from the average interaction score, the irregular servers having relative deviation below a first reference deviation or above a second relative deviation.

18. A method as claimed in claim 17 wherein the first reference deviation is a predefined range below the average interaction score and the second relative deviation is a predetermined range above the average interaction score.

19. A method as claimed in claim 14 wherein the steps are repeated at the one or more predetermined times.

20. A computer readable medium including instructions to one or more computers for performing steps to balance server interactions across two or more file servers in a network, wherein interaction data relating to server interactions is recorded in one or more log files, the steps including at one or more predetermined times:

analysing interaction data from one or more log files to obtain an interaction score for two or more servers in a network,

comparing the interaction score for each of the two or more servers to interaction criteria and identifying any irregular servers in the two or more servers,

identifying one or more groups of data, if any, to be moved to or from the irregular servers to balance the server interactions, and

moving said groups of data.

21. A computer readable medium as claimed in claim 20 wherein the steps include consolidating the one or more log files prior to analysing the interaction data.

22. A computer readable medium as claimed in claim 20 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction and which of the two or more servers was involved in the interaction.

23. A computer readable medium as claimed in claim 20 wherein the interaction data includes the type of the server interaction, and wherein analysing the interaction data includes assigning a weighting factor to the one or more types of server interaction and determining a sum of the weighting factors for the server interactions associated with each of the two or more servers, and wherein the interaction score is the sum.

24. A computer readable medium as claimed in claim 20 wherein interaction criteria are a first preferred interaction score and a second preferred interaction score, the one or more irregular servers being one or more servers where the interaction score is below the first preferred interaction score or above the second preferred interaction score, and wherein the one or more groups of data are moved from the irregular servers having the interaction score above the second preferred interaction score to the irregular servers having the interaction score below the first preferred interaction score.

25. A computer readable medium as claimed in claim 24 wherein the first preferred interaction score and the second preferred interaction score are dynamically determined using an average of the interaction scores of is all of the two or more servers.

26. A computer readable medium as claimed in claim 20 wherein the one or more groups of data are temporarily moved to a temporary storage location.