|NowSMS Load Balancing particular SMPP connections||Search|
|SMS & MMS Technical Forum » NowSMS Support - SMS Issues (Product Support Only) » Archive through April 11, 2011 » NowSMS Load Balancing particular SMPP connections||« Previous || Next »|
Post Number: 52
We're busy looking into the load balancing solution NowSMS provides and have done some testing to gain a basic understanding of how it works.
For our current situation though, we're wondering if it is possible to have a load balanced solution where a specific number of connections are in the Network Shared folder, where the NowSMS servers can use to send messages, but at the same time also take its own localised SMPP connections into account.
The problem we're facing is; we've got the same number of connections to all our providers on alll our machines.
Unfortunately, we also have a single connection that is living on one of the machines. While it is possible to have multiple sessions, we cannot spread the load of this connection's volume over two machines.
Having this load balanced does seem to make it possible.
Is this something that can be done?
|Des - NowSMS Support
Post Number: 2882
Sorry that it's taken me awhile to reply.
I've been giving this some thought, and I guess it depends. Is all of this connection's traffic really self-contained? If so, it might make sense for it to be its own NowSMS server. With maybe an upstream connection to the other NowSMS.
Or, if the issue is that you simply cannot connect to this SMPP connection from multiple servers, then what I'd suggest is having the load balanced NowSMS servers sharing the exact same configuration. But, for this SMPP connection, use an alias hostname in the configuration. In the HOSTS file (\windows\system32\drivers\etc), resolve this alias to the correct IP address on one of the systems, and to an incorrect address on the other. The one with the incorrect address will try to connect but fail, but it will still know about the connection so that it won't try to route messages for that connection to another connection.
Or maybe I am misunderstanding the concern?