Installation on separate server

[Steve Diamond]

The ASP-db installation instructions say to install the component on the Web server. Are there alternatives?

For example, in a moderately large, scalable Web site, you might have a cluster of Web servers with load balancing and a single database server. Would it make sense to dedicate a separate middleware server just to running ASP-db?

Does ASP-db support such a configuration? (It seems to me that under Win2K it ought to work, but I haven't tried it.) If the current release does not support a distributed configuration, will the 2002 release support it?

A separate server seems like a good idea for reliability and scalability, but what about performance? Have you tested this kind of configuration? Do you have any statistics comparing performance when installed on a separate server to performance when installed on the Web server?

Thanks for your help.

Steve Diamond

[John]

Hi Steve,

I'll throw in my 2 cents on this and everyone else is welcome to add their experiences...

It's very common to have your web server and database server be on separate machines. In fact, it's encouraged in high volume environments. In really high traffic systems, you can have multiple web servers, and then only use ASPdb on the server that needs to handle the database queries / updates, etc.

This is how that would work...

User comes in and hits a random server in a web farm. User does his/her surfing on that machine or whatever machine they bounce around to. Finally user clicks on a link that needs db access. That link is directed to the IIS/DB web server with ASPdb on it. It handles the request, passing the DB query part off to the DB server and answers the user's query.

This way, you only use the web/db server when it's needed.

Performance this way is scalable to very large installations. You can have multiple ASPdb/IIS servers and multiple db servers this way, it's just that you have to "stick" with the one you started with since that one has your session variables and maintains the state of your connection as it were (sort order, filter conditions, etc.) We have banks using this type of system along with other large setups such as government and commercial installs.

Hope this helps,

John



------------
Steve Diamond at 10/23/01 1:41:10 PM

The ASP-db installation instructions say to install the component on the Web server. Are there alternatives?

For example, in a moderately large, scalable Web site, you might have a cluster of Web servers with load balancing and a single database server. Would it make sense to dedicate a separate middleware server just to running ASP-db?

Does ASP-db support such a configuration? (It seems to me that under Win2K it ought to work, but I haven't tried it.) If the current release does not support a distributed configuration, will the 2002 release support it?

A separate server seems like a good idea for reliability and scalability, but what about performance? Have you tested this kind of configuration? Do you have any statistics comparing performance when installed on a separate server to performance when installed on the Web server?

Thanks for your help.

Steve Diamond

[Ken Ambrose]

Hi,
I installed ASPDB on the web server, and the SQL Server DB is on a completely seperate box. Never considered doing it any other way...

Ken


------------
Steve Diamond at 10/23/01 1:41:10 PM

The ASP-db installation instructions say to install the component on the Web server. Are there alternatives?

For example, in a moderately large, scalable Web site, you might have a cluster of Web servers with load balancing and a single database server. Would it make sense to dedicate a separate middleware server just to running ASP-db?

Does ASP-db support such a configuration? (It seems to me that under Win2K it ought to work, but I haven't tried it.) If the current release does not support a distributed configuration, will the 2002 release support it?

A separate server seems like a good idea for reliability and scalability, but what about performance? Have you tested this kind of configuration? Do you have any statistics comparing performance when installed on a separate server to performance when installed on the Web server?

Thanks for your help.

Steve Diamond

[Frank Kwong]

There is a product asp-dbFarm.... It never make it to the market. In the beginning, everybody was scrambling for a Web-Farm solution like this and I made one up and store all the session in the SQL server (6.5 by then). All ooks good. Ask MS and make sure they do not have one like that. Ready to go and then went to the .NET preview and talked to a few guys doing it also. The words are not good as the performance of the session server is so slow that they scrap the ideas. Besides, it that one goes down, you are down ! Gave a lot of thoughts about this issue and finally words come for MS that .NET is going to do it. Cache, Farm... the whole work. They seem to tbe able to store the sessions in memory at least in one of the option! So, I would not spin any wheels in NT & W2K... what NT & W2K ? MS already announceed the drop dead date of them and Oct 1st for NT (it is gone) and 2003 for W2K.... MS has burned all the bridges and force the .NET into our lives. I hope it is good... 30 books out before 1.0 release ? Looks like there is something in it.

Waiting for my harware to come up for my ASP-db.NET server. Your active folks will be invited to take a peak and for the Gold folks... you can have the DLL any time (Xcopy install !!). Becasue .NET breaks all the code (don't believe the conversion stuff), I have a bit of excuse to break some ASP-db code (for the power). With this golden opportunity to re-write the whole thing, the least I can do is to knock my customers off their chair. I might have to install a seat belt in my chair so I won't felt off also the way it goes. If you have any wish list items.. you better turn it in now. Unless I hit a surprise, plan to release ASP-db.NET with .NET in Dec 15th....

FK


------------
Ken Ambrose at 10/23/01 9:04:11 P

Hi,
I installed ASPDB on the web server, and the SQL Server DB is on a completely seperate box. Never considered doing it any other way...

Ken


------------
Steve Diamond at 10/23/01 1:41:10 PM

The ASP-db installation instructions say to install the component on the Web server. Are there alternatives?

For example, in a moderately large, scalable Web site, you might have a cluster of Web servers with load balancing and a single database server. Would it make sense to dedicate a separate middleware server just to running ASP-db?

Does ASP-db support such a configuration? (It seems to me that under Win2K it ought to work, but I haven't tried it.) If the current release does not support a distributed configuration, will the 2002 release support it?

A separate server seems like a good idea for reliability and scalability, but what about performance? Have you tested this kind of configuration? Do you have any statistics comparing performance when installed on a separate server to performance when installed on the Web server?

Thanks for your help.

Steve Diamond