| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
prescottw
Junior Member
189 Posts |
 Posted - 13 February 2007 : 11:55:38
|
Hello Fellow Snitzlings
I've been on a shared 2003 and (2000) Server for a couple of years and at times it takes longer than I would like for my sites to load.
I'm pretty easy when it comes to this type of performance but it's time I became more efficient as well as my site(s) performance.
SQL Server is on a Shared server and the site files are on a different server. At times I've been told by tech support that when other sites are sending email it often drags the server down to a whisper of effeciency.
1. Is this a SQL Server issue (I don't think so) or is this a 2003 issue or is this a combination of both.
2. If I dedicate my sites to a W2003 2.4 celeron, 1024mb ram, 80 Gb HD and 1000 gb Babndwidth is thuis going to keep my sites top a level of effency that I'm looking for.
3. Will I be able to respectively support 500 vistitors at once without waiting for the site to load.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thank You,
-Scott
|
What day is it anyway? |
Edited by - prescottw on 13 February 2007 11:57:53 |
|
|
ruirib
Snitz Forums Admin
Portugal
26364 Posts |
Posted - 13 February 2007 : 12:32:03
|
1. The email thing seems like a Windows 2003 issue.
2,3. Not sure about the ability of that celeron to handle all that traffic. 1 GB RAM is not much for SQL Server, but probably HuwR can offer some better insight into that. |
Snitz 3.4 Readme | Like the support? Support Snitz too |
 |
|
|
prescottw
Junior Member
189 Posts |
Posted - 13 February 2007 : 12:41:08
|
Hi ruirib
The SQL Server is still in a shared environment. I'm just switching to a dedicated 2003 server.
I'm not sure what bandwidth as I pay by the year for my Db's on SQL server.
Thanks for you kind support.
-Scott |
What day is it anyway? |
|
|
|
pdrg
Support Moderator
United Kingdom
2897 Posts |
Posted - 13 February 2007 : 13:46:20
|
You'll be able to tell easily if it's a DB or webserver issue - do non-database ASP pages take longer than you'd like to run too? If so, it's (at least in part) the web server as opposed to the db
1000Gb 'bandwidth' (actually data transfer) is lots - a Terabyte - but makes no difference to speed or efficiency, it's just like the amount of 'stuff' you can use before you're charged extra - whether that 'stuff' is delivered at a pint a day or all at once isn't factored!
Celery processors are truly lame - they have nice sounding numbers but they really badly misuse that clock speed, they're just a marketing term for 'heck, how can we sell this out-of-date pile of crud?', so if you can, at least get a real processor.
Guarantees that your site will handle the load? Can't give them - but can give you some ideas if you can supply all the server stats for the previous year or so - visitors/day, peak concurrent visitors, db growth over time, archiving procedures, hosts architecture (incl interconnection of servers - fibre?), cluster design, etc...basically a heap of stuff you probably can't find out, which means predicting real-world performance is tricky too.
Best bet is to start with a reasonable setup and if it's struggling, throw resources at the problem. If I told you most big companies who you'd have thought ought to know better use this approach as no other approaches really work (not really, for unknown variables), would you forgive me for suggesting it? |
|
|
|
prescottw
Junior Member
189 Posts |
Posted - 13 February 2007 : 15:07:31
|
Thanks pdrg,
I'll shortcut nonDb pages on my desktop and click when main page is creeping to the fold. I'll check for same symtoms for nonDB pages. (I can't believe I didn't think about this).
I thought about the "throw resources at it too." As far as the Celeron... entry level all the way. Setup is only 25.00. I didn't see any AMD Processors to chose from. I could always upgrade and dump the Celeron they did offer pentium. The DB direction is not going to change at this point in time... Hopefully. (SQL Server dedicated is VERY expensive).
Thanks again pdrg and ruirib.
-Scott |
What day is it anyway? |
|
|
|
HuwR
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
20595 Posts |
Posted - 13 February 2007 : 17:52:14
|
quote:
At times I've been told by tech support that when other sites are sending email it often drags the server down to a whisper of effeciency.
This is a common problem and is mainly because the mail sending dll's are not multithreaded, that is the main reason subscriptions are not enabled on the forums here, even on a pretty high specced server the mail functions cause extreme slowdown.
a celeron may be perfectly adequate to serve your purposes, but would a little more info on your sites visitor stats to make a decision, they may be "lame" as pdrg said, but a website does not actually require that much in the way of CPU to process it's requests, RAM (1Gb should be fine)and fast drives are far more important than the CPU, especially if you are not sharing it with a few hundred other sites. If you can get a setup with atleast 2 drives then I would suggest that you get one with at least 2 drives, one for the system and logging and a seperate drive for your website files.
|
|
|
|
prescottw
Junior Member
189 Posts |
Posted - 13 February 2007 : 19:39:42
|
Thanks HuwR,
2 drives are available. Not exactly sure how to accomplish the dual drives as far as directories go yet, but I see the need in order to speed things up and stay speedy.
I do allow subscriptions and it is a headache. New Members would subscribe to a Forum level (Bad) and gripe at me because I'm sending them email... I cut that level to topic after a year or so (not soon enough).
OK HuwR Thanks again for the info.
-Scott
Utilizing Snitz for 5 years next month.
|
What day is it anyway? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
