Web Site Efficiency

[jerry_ys]

Hope i'm in the right group. I'm developing a small non-commercial website to
run on windows 2000 pro with IIS. How many simultaneous users (approx) can
this handle and what happens to the end-user if server freezes from too many
users?
(assume an upper end desktop configuration). The heart of the system will
be the
development of a data access COMPONENT (active exe rather than dll to better
centrally control user data access. Also setting single thread rather than
multiple thread again to better control access from the program.) Any
Comments suggestions for improved efficiency would be greatly appreciated).

thank you

[Mark J. McGinty]

"jerry_ys" <jerryys@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:04800905-0F1F-4441-A1DB-455939389F76@microsoft.com...

> Hope i'm in the right group. I'm developing a small non-commercial website
> to
> run on windows 2000 pro with IIS. How many simultaneous users (approx) can
> this handle and what happens to the end-user if server freezes from too
> many
> users?
> (assume an upper end desktop configuration). The heart of the system will
> be the
> development of a data access COMPONENT (active exe rather than dll to
> better
> centrally control user data access. Also setting single thread rather than
> multiple thread again to better control access from the program.) Any
> Comments suggestions for improved efficiency would be greatly
> appreciated).

It's impossible to say based on the information you've provided. The server
will queue requests until queue depth exceeds maximum, then the user will
get a server busy error. If any timeouts expire in the process of servicing
a request, a 500-100 error will be returned. If your bandwidth is
exhausted, a server not found error will occur -- the same will happen if
IIS or the server itself crashes, or if your DNS support for the domain is
inadequate.

Any limitations imposed/incurred by various components, or other facets of
your architecture will of course be added.

Server capacity is a very complex formula, it must take into account the
amount of server-side processing each request will require, and the number
of requests each user session will generate. And remember, you must be able
to handle load peaks, not averages.


-Mark

> thank you
>

[jerry_ys]

Mark, thanks for info on server. my main point there was more of to set up the
informal setting. The main feedback i was looking for dealt with the
components
group related stuff. specifically what do you think of an app that must use
say
std OS access methods on a server to control multiple user access to a file
under it's control. Do you feel active x exe is much better than dll and why?
thanks for
any advise.

jerry


"Mark J. McGinty" wrote:

>
> "jerry_ys" <jerryys@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:04800905-0F1F-4441-A1DB-455939389F76@microsoft.com...

> > Hope i'm in the right group. I'm developing a small non-commercial website
> > to
> > run on windows 2000 pro with IIS. How many simultaneous users (approx) can
> > this handle and what happens to the end-user if server freezes from too
> > many
> > users?
> > (assume an upper end desktop configuration). The heart of the system will
> > be the
> > development of a data access COMPONENT (active exe rather than dll to
> > better
> > centrally control user data access. Also setting single thread rather than
> > multiple thread again to better control access from the program.) Any
> > Comments suggestions for improved efficiency would be greatly
> > appreciated).

>
> It's impossible to say based on the information you've provided. The server
> will queue requests until queue depth exceeds maximum, then the user will
> get a server busy error. If any timeouts expire in the process of servicing
> a request, a 500-100 error will be returned. If your bandwidth is
> exhausted, a server not found error will occur -- the same will happen if
> IIS or the server itself crashes, or if your DNS support for the domain is
> inadequate.
>
> Any limitations imposed/incurred by various components, or other facets of
> your architecture will of course be added.
>
> Server capacity is a very complex formula, it must take into account the
> amount of server-side processing each request will require, and the number
> of requests each user session will generate. And remember, you must be able
> to handle load peaks, not averages.
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
>

> > thank you
> >

>
>
>

[Egbert Nierop \(MVP for IIS\)]

"jerry_ys" <jerryys@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:04800905-0F1F-4441-A1DB-455939389F76@microsoft.com...

> Hope i'm in the right group. I'm developing a small non-commercial website
> to
> run on windows 2000 pro with IIS. How many simultaneous users (approx) can
> this handle and what happens to the end-user if server freezes from too
> many
> users?
> (assume an upper end desktop configuration). The heart of the system will
> be the
> development of a data access COMPONENT (active exe rather than dll to
> better
> centrally control user data access. Also setting single thread rather than
> multiple thread again to better control access from the program.) Any
> Comments suggestions for improved efficiency would be greatly
> appreciated).
>
> thank you

Say 10 users or so on a average server.

Understanding from your question about the .exe shows you do this the first
time possibly. Never use DCOM exes to 'centralize' data management from IIS
perspective.
Always use Apartment modeld COM servers (VB6 can create them) since the
Windows Platform _does_ optimzie your connections by pooling resources. So
forget all you learned about accessing SQL server through a db connection.
All this knowledge only is valid for single EXE files, not for IIS.

Each ASP page, can create it's own ADODB.Connection ( I assume you talk
about this) and close it afterwards. If you have say 200 web asp sessions,
there will be an effective 10 (approximately) db connections active.


compatible web farm Session replacement for Asp and Asp.Net
[url]http://www.nieropwebconsult.nl/asp_session_manager.htm[/url]