This post is more than 5 years old
34 Posts
0
11055
What happens to connected clients if the broker reboots or otherwise becomes unavailable?
Our environment includes a single broker that also has web access installed on it. This machine is on our internal network. We have an SSL gateway machine in the DMZ as well. My question is, what happens to established sessions if the broker (and web access) computer is rebooted or otherwise not available for a brief period. It would seem to me that once the broker sets up a session and the VM and client set up an RDP session, possibly including the ssl gateway if external, existing sessions would be OK, but new ones would obviously not be possible till the broker came back online. At the moment I have no way to test that theory.
Thanks for your help.
Steve
tonymm1
9 Posts
1
October 8th, 2010 19:00
Users will keep their connections unless the Secure-it (SSL) servers reboots.
sgravel
34 Posts
0
October 8th, 2010 20:00
Great - thanks
PatrickRAtDell
37 Posts
1
October 8th, 2010 20:00
It's a best practice to design any vWorkspace Farm with redundant brokers so you can reboot or perform maintenance on one without affecting production. In AppPortal, Web Access, ThinShell, Config.xml you can list multiple brokers that will be randomly selected to process the user's authentication. If one dies or is unavailable, the environment will be unaffected.
sgravel
34 Posts
0
October 8th, 2010 21:00
Point taken. We're kinda small, so things like additional Windows server licenses are not always a given, but I agree the redundancy is an important feature of an optimal design.
In some solutions, it's my understanding that multiple brokers cannot manage the same VM or group of VMs. From your answer, I take it that this is not the case with vWorkspace?
Michel Roth
173 Posts
1
October 9th, 2010 13:00
To add: Whenever a broker is added to a vWorkspace farm, it will immediately share in the load of the other broker(s).
sgravel
34 Posts
0
October 14th, 2010 15:00
Good to know. In my small business world, I'll need to sit tight til next budget year to get the relevant Windows server licensing, etc., but that's pretty cool. IIRC with other products we looked at, including View, you could not have multiple brokers managing the same VMs, which was definitely a drawback.