Start a Conversation

This post is more than 5 years old

Solved!

Go to Solution

86570

October 29th, 2010 13:00

"Drainstop" a terminal server

Hi!

First post here, hope I can explain my question.

Is there a way to drainstop a terminal server when users are connecting through vWorspace Connection Broker (7.1)?

Our setup is that multiple terminal servers (or remote desktop servers) shares a published application (desktop). If you remove a server from that published app, the users are not connecting to the removed server (as it should be).

Now, can you somehow remove a server from a published app, but allow disconnected sessions (that is connected to the removed server) to still be able to reconnect to that server? New users with no active (or disconnected) sessions will be connected to a server that is still active and shares the app.

Regards,

Alexander

1 Rookie

 • 

64 Posts

November 3rd, 2010 21:00

OK - we've been looking at this today. The Enable/Disable Logons feature works in 7.1 and 7.2 beta 2 for x86 Terminal Servers. In the final version of 7.2 we will support x64 Terminal Servers and Session Hosts.

19 Posts

October 30th, 2010 10:00

I am sure someone will correct me but...no.

A server can either be an available server or not for a published app.  You would have to create a secondary app to give the group of people that are in a disconnected state and manage that manually.  Not pretty.

November 1st, 2010 09:00

Hello,

Instead of removing the Server from a Published App, I would try the following.

1. Create a new workload evaluator with a "Number of Users" Counter

2. Set the Max number of Users to  0

3. Assign this Workload Evaluator directly to the Terminal Server that you wish to Disable.

This should stop new connections but allow existing disconnected sessions to re-connect.

There are certain setups where this method won't work - but give it a go, it might be ideal for you.

Thanks, Andrew.

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

Hi Andrew!

We tried this, but it did not work... I created a "Workload Evaluator" with the counter "Number of Users" to a "Max Value" of 0... Users without disconnected sessions were still able to logon to the server where I applied this Workload Evaluator (are currently using 2 terminal servers with a published desktop).

Regards,

Alexander

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

Hi!

Yes, that would be a solution, but it's not pretty as you said.. 

// Alexander

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

I sure, had... Changed it to "Not specified", will give it another try and report back.. 

// Alexander

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

I'm sorry to say that the connection broker does not detect if the server is "draining".... It sends client to that server despite beeing drainstopped (change logon /drain).

You only get the usual "Remove logins are currently disabled". 

// Alexander

1 Rookie

 • 

98 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

I always drainstop the servers from the server itself

Enable, disable, or drain session logins.

CHANGE LOGON {/QUERY | /ENABLE | /DISABLE | /DRAIN | /DRAINUNTILRESTART}

  /QUERY    Query current session login mode.
  /ENABLE   Enable user login from sessions.
  /DISABLE  Disable user login from sessions.
  /DRAIN    Disable new user logons, but allow reconnections to existing sessions.
  /DRAINUNTILRESTART    Disable new user logons until the server is restarted, but allow reconnections to existing sessions.

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

How do you handle it in combination with vWorkspace connection broker?

// Alexander

November 1st, 2010 12:00

If you have a Workload evaluator on the published app, this may override the W.E applied at the TS level. 

1 Rookie

 • 

98 Posts

November 1st, 2010 12:00

The conenction broker should automatically determine if a TS server is accepting connections.

I haven't done much with the CB yet as I am working on a migration from the microsoft RDS, but putting any of my systems into drain mode doesn't cause me any issues at all with applications or logins...

I would assume the Quest one is just as smart as it needs to be able to handle a Server thats gone offlne without being in Drain mode too...(ie, someone shutting down the server)

November 1st, 2010 13:00

Hitting the same issue as you. Can you let me know what OS you're testing with?

November 1st, 2010 13:00

Hmm, so my cunning plan isn't nearly as cunning as I hoped!  I'll do some testing here

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 13:00

No ,not according to my tests..  It would be interesting to hear about you results.

29 Posts

November 1st, 2010 13:00

I'm running the tests on Windows Server 2008 R2 only.

// Alexander

No Events found!

Top