Adaptive Load Balancing for Multi-Tier Application Chains

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current load-balancing technologies in multi-tiered application environments often make routing decisions based solely on data from a single tier, leading to suboptimal end-to-end application paths and potential application failures, as they fail to consider the performance and status of multiple tiers within the application chain.

Innovation Solution

Implementing an adaptive load-balancing system that utilizes an application path table to select the best end-to-end application path across multiple tiers, taking into account performance data from previous transactions, user preferences, service level agreements, and dynamic workload requirements, and making routing decisions based on this holistic view.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If load-balancers make routing decisions based solely on single-tier data, then device complexity is reduced and ease of operation is improved, but end-to-end application performance and reliability deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverouting decision simplicityVSAvoidend-to-end application performance
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges routing decision-making across multiple tiers into a unified load-balancer that considers application chains spanning web, application, and database tiers. The system combines health check data, performance metrics, and path status information from multiple tiers to make holistic routing decisions, thereby maintaining operational simplicity while improving end-to-end reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The load-balancer acts as an intermediary that collects and processes information from multiple tiers before making routing decisions. It mediates between individual tier health checks and final routing outcomes by maintaining application path tables that track end-to-end path status, allowing simple local decisions to be coordinated into reliable global routing without requiring complex distributed decision-making.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Device complexity

If load-balancers implement health checks and load algorithms only within their respective tier, then device complexity and processing overhead are reduced, but the ability to determine optimal end-to-end paths deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveload-balancing mechanism complexityVSAvoidend-to-end path performance assessment
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments end-to-end application chains into discrete paths that can be individually tracked and evaluated. Each application path is represented as a separate entry in the application path table, allowing the load-balancer to assess and compare multiple complete paths without requiring complex analysis of individual tier interactions. This segmentation enables precise measurement of end-to-end path performance while keeping the evaluation mechanism manageable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Adaptability or versatility

If multiple load-balancers make independent decisions in each tier, then system scalability and adaptability are improved, but cumulative routing errors leading to application failures increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemulti-tier load balancing flexibilityVSAvoidapplication chain success rate
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where the load-balancer continuously monitors application path performance and updates the application path table with current status information. Health checks and performance metrics from multiple tiers feed back into the routing decision process, allowing the system to adapt to changing conditions while maintaining awareness of end-to-end path status. This feedback loop prevents cumulative errors by correcting routing decisions based on actual path performance rather than isolated tier decisions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3334103B1Adaptive load balancing for application chains
Publication Date: 2021.03.31 CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC
  • EP3334103B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3334103B1 patent drawingFigure 2A
  • EP3334103B1 patent drawingFigure 2B

AI summary

Disclosed are systems, methods, and computer-readable storage media for adaptive load balancing for application chains. A load-balancer can receive a data packet for a connection/transaction to be routed through an application chain. The load-balancer can select, based on an application path table, a first end-to-end application path through the application chain. The application path table can identify two or more end-to-end application paths through the application chain along with a corresponding performance status for each end-to-end application path through the application chain. The performance status for an application path can indicate a performance level of the end-to-end application path determined based on performance of previous data packets for previous connections transmitted through the application chain according to the end-to-end application path. The load-balancer can then route the data packet through the application chain according to the first end-to-end application path and across multiple tiers.