ARBITRATING AN APPROPRIATE BACK-END SERVER TO RECEIVE CHANNELS OF A CLIENT SESSSION

• US 20100106839A1
• Filed: 12/21/2009
• Published: 04/29/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 09/12/2005
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC (Microsoft Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Microsoft Corporation
• Inventors: Moutafov, Kamen Kamenov
• Granted Patent: US 7,945,611 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 709/226
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/505 considering the load
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/52 Program synchronisation; Mutual exclusion, e.g. by means of semaphores
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 9/547 Remote procedure calls [RPC]; Web services

Abstract

The present invention extends to methods, systems, and computer program products for arbitrating an appropriate back-end server to receive channels of a client connection. Each front-end server in a server farm specifies a back-end server in the server farm that it deems appropriate for receiving channels of a client connection. Each specified back-end server is represented by an arbitration mechanism. A relevant set of potential back-end servers that can receive channels of a client connection is selected according to function configured to minimize performance impact. A load balancing service compares arbitration mechanisms for different back-end servers in the set of potential back-end servers to determine an appropriate back-end server for receiving channels of the client connection.

Claims

1. At a computer system including a load balancing service, a method for arbitrating an appropriate back-end server to receive channels of a client session, the method comprising:

an act of receiving an indication of a first arbitration mechanism for a first back-end server, the first back-end server indicated by a first front-end server as the appropriate back-end server to receive channels of the client session;

an act of receiving an indication of a second different arbitration mechanism for a second back-end server, the second back-end server indicated by a second front-end server as the appropriate back-end server to receive channels of the client session;

an act of comparing an arbitration order value representing the first arbitration mechanism to an arbitration order value representing the second different arbitration mechanism to determine whether the first arbitration mechanism or the second different arbitration mechanism indicates an a back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other back-end servers; and

an act of selecting the first back-end server to receive channels of the client session based on the results of the comparison determining that the first arbitration mechanism is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other arbitration mechanisms.

2. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the computer system includes a second load balancing service, the method further comprising:

an act of the second load balancing service receiving the indication of the first arbitration mechanism for the first back-end server;

an act of the second load balancing service receiving the indication of the second different arbitration mechanism for the second back-end server;

an act of the second load balancing service comparing the arbitration order value representing the first arbitration mechanism to the arbitration order value representing the second different arbitration mechanism to determine whether the first arbitration mechanism or the second different arbitration mechanism indicates an back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other back-end servers; and

an act of the second load balancing service selecting the first back-end server to receive channels of the client session based on the results of the comparison determining that the first arbitration mechanism is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other arbitration mechanisms such that the selection made by the first load balancing service and the second load balancing service are consistent.

3. The method as recited in claim 2, wherein the computer system includes one or more additional load balancing services, the method further comprising:

an act of each the one or more additional load balancing services receiving the indication of the first arbitration mechanism, the indication of the second arbitration mechanism, and indications of one or more additional arbitration mechanisms, the one or more additional arbitration mechanisms for one or more additional back-end servers, each the one or more additional back-end servers indicated by a corresponding additional front-end server as the appropriate back-end server to receive channels of the client session;

an act of each of the one or more additional load balancing services comparing the arbitration order value representing the first arbitration mechanism to the arbitration order value representing the second different arbitration mechanism and to arbitration order values representing the one or more additional arbitration mechanisms to determine a back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other arbitration mechanisms; and

an act of each of the one or more additional load balancing services selecting the first back-end server to receive channels of the client session based on the results of the comparison determining that the first arbitration mechanism is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other arbitration mechanisms such that the selection made by the first load balancing service, the second load balancing service, and each of the additional load balancing services are consistent.

4. The method as recited in claim 3, further comprising:

an act of at least one of the additional loading balancing services granting a lock to a back-end server other than the first back-end sever for committing the first arbitration mechanism to other load balancing services of the computer system.

5. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

an act of the first load balancing service determining that a promotion process has not yet begun for the session; and

an act of granting the first back-end server a lock for committing the first arbitration mechanism to other load balancing services of the computer system.

6. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the computer system is a server farm including a plurality of front-end servers and a plurality of back-end servers.

7. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

an act of denying a lock to the second back-end server based on the results of the comparison by the load balancing service.

8. The method as recited in claim 7, further comprising:

an act of the second back-end server revoking any previously obtained locks received from other load balancing services.

9. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the an act of the load balancing service selecting the first back-end server as the appropriate backend server to receive channels of the client session comprises an act of installing the first back-end server as the highest ranking contender.

10. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising an act of granting a third back-end server a lock for committing the first arbitration mechanism to other load balancing services of the computer system prior to comparing the arbitration order value representing the first arbitration mechanism to the arbitration order value representing the second different arbitration mechanism;

and

wherein the act of comparing the arbitration order value representing the first arbitration mechanism to the arbitration order value representing the second different arbitration mechanism is for determining if the first back-end server should replace the second back-end server as the highest ranking contender.

11. The method as recited in claim 10, further comprising:

an act of denying a lock to the second back-end server based on the results of the comparison by the load balancing service.

12. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the first and second front-end servers are proxy servers.

13. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising:

an act of the load balancing service comparing the arbitration order value representing the first arbitration mechanism and the arbitration order value representing the second different arbitration mechanism to one or more additional arbitration order values prior to selecting the first back-end server as the appropriate backend server.

14. A system for arbitrating an appropriate back-end server for receiving channels of a client session, the system comprising:

a plurality of front-end servers,

a plurality of back-end servers configured to receive channels of client sessions from the plurality of front-end servers;

a plurality of load balancing services communicatively coupled to the plurality of front-end servers and communicatively coupled to the plurality of back-end servers;

each front-end server configured to;

create a desired order of one or more back-end servers from the plurality of back-end servers, a back-end server'"'"'s position in the desired order indicating the back-end server'"'"'s appropriateness, from the perspective of the front-end server, for receiving channels of the client session;

extract a relevant subset of back-end servers from the desired order; and

promote a specified contender back-end server to at least one of the plurality of load balance services as the most appropriate back-end server to receive channels of the client session;

each load balancing service configured to;

receive indications of arbitration mechanisms for back-end servers, each back-end server indicated by corresponding front-end server as the appropriate back-end server to receive channels of the client session;

compare arbitration mechanisms corresponding to different contender back-end servers to determine a highest ranking contender back-end server; and

install the highest ranking contender back-end server based on the results of comparing arbitration mechanisms.

15. The system as recited in claim 14, wherein each load balancing service is further configured to return an already committed status when promotion is complete.

16. The system as recited in claim 14, wherein each load balancing service is further configured to:

determine that the promotion process has not yet begun for a session when no session is found; and

grant a first back-end server a lock for committing its arbitration mechanism for the appropriate back-end server for the session to other load balancing services of the computer system when its arbitration mechanism is the first received arbitration mechanism.

17. A computer program product for use at a computer system including a load balancing service, the computer program product for implementing a method for arbitrating an appropriate back-end server to receive channels of a client session, the computer program product comprising one or more computer storage media having stored thereon computer-executable instructions that, when executed at a processor, cause the load balancing service to perform the method, including the following:

receive a plurality of arbitration order values, each arbitration order value representing an arbitration mechanism at a corresponding back-end server, each back-end server indicated by a corresponding front-end server as the appropriate back-end server to receive channels of the client session;

compare the plurality of arbitration order values to one another to determine which arbitration order value indicates a back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other back-end servers; and

select a specified back-end server as the back-end server to receive channels of the client session based on the results of the comparison determining that the arbitration order value for the specified back-end server indicates a back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other back-end servers.

18. The computer program product as recited in claim 17, wherein the computer system is a server farm including a plurality of front-end servers and a plurality of back-end servers.

19. The computer program product as recited in claim 17, wherein the computer system further includes a second load balancing service, and further comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed, cause a second load balancing service to:

receive the plurality of arbitration order values;

compare the plurality of arbitration order values to one another to determine which arbitration order value indicates a back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other back-end servers; and

select the specified back-end server as the back-end server to receive channels of the client session based on the results of the comparison determining that arbitration order value for the specified back-end server indicates a back-end server that is more appropriate for receiving channels of the client session relative to other back-end servers such that the selection made by the first load balancing service and the second load balancing service are consistent.

20. The computer program product as recited in claim 17, wherein the first and second front-end servers are proxy servers.