Clustering the way to go?
From: John Staggs (JohnStaggs_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 02/10/05
- Next message: Brian: "Adding Nodes to a Cluster"
- Previous message: Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]: "Re: after move 2nd node doesn't mound shared drives"
- Next in thread: Don Wilwol: "Re: Clustering the way to go?"
- Reply: Don Wilwol: "Re: Clustering the way to go?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 08:39:04 -0800
I'm trying to decide on the best scenerio for us to use at work here with our
web application. I'd love it if you guys would give some input on what you'd
do to help give me a idea on what is the "Right" solution, because I don't
want to go and spend money on something that isn't right. Let me start off
and explain our application about how it works, and what we currently have
setup.
We have a asp.Net application over MSSQL to start off with. Currently we
have 3 frontend servers load balancing IIS, and using a 3rd part application
to handle replication between the servers. We use a Alteon Load Balancer to
handle the LB. Then we have 2x backend boxes running MSSQL.
The application we run is just one website, but we have school districts
login from all over the United States that use it. The primary use of the
application is when the teachers fill out forms... Basically the teacher will
go in, and select a form they need to fill out for a particular kid, and it
will bring up the pdf, she then fills it out, and hits save and we save the
data in a fdf that we store in a database and so if she ever needs to
use/edit that form again she goes back and all the data is stored etc.
The scenerio I was looking at, was creating a cluster, having 3 frontend
servers attacahed to a SAN that housed the code&pdf's so replication wouldn't
have to take place anymore, or creating a file server with 2x boxes and a
shared disk array to just handle the pdf's, and continue to load balance the
frontends... The downfall to that is, we are having some session persistance
problems using the load balancer.
At this point I'm just trying to come up with a good solution, that will not
effect the application performance negativley. If anyone could give some
insight on what they would do. Thanks.
- Next message: Brian: "Adding Nodes to a Cluster"
- Previous message: Rodney R. Fournier [MVP]: "Re: after move 2nd node doesn't mound shared drives"
- Next in thread: Don Wilwol: "Re: Clustering the way to go?"
- Reply: Don Wilwol: "Re: Clustering the way to go?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
