ClusterXL Load Sharing vs Maestro Thrughtput

[JSingh_N]

Hi,

It is highlighted that Maestro solution keep all the gateways in active - active state and hence throughput is increased (Number of GWs multiply by throughput of each GW).

As per my understanding, in ClusterXL Load Sharing mode also, all GWs are in active state and processing the traffic in parallel so here also throughput should be increased as in Maestro.

What if ClusterXL Load Sharing mode (unicast) and Maestro solution both have 2 GWs only? Throughput will be same in both cases or major difference. ?

Regards,

Jaspal Singh

[Chris_Atkinson · Accepted solution]

The approaches are not equal, traffic distribution & sync are performed differently in favor of Maestro achieving the much higher throughput.

Maestro has much lower overheads as additional members are added.

Note ElasticXL will be an alternate approach moving forward.

[the_rock]

What @Chris_Atkinson said is 100% correct.

Andy