but it's not at all abusive). Also, it depends on how you measure
concurrency. Some people do it by # of cf sessions, some by DB last
activity time, and others by whatever their log stats says. Others would
argue that you can't measure user concurrency, but hits/sec concurrency.
If you talk to CF support engineers, they will ask you about concurrent
hits.
You won't find much better performance with CF Enterprise, unless you're
sending mass amounts of email. I have an app that runs way more traffic
on cf standard, no slowdowns.
What it really probably boils down to is your application. I know you
can't share your code (not even the nasty parts), but that would be
helpful. Perhaps we could help a bit.
It sounds like you need to do some performance tuning. Perhaps
re-evaluate some of the things you do, and they way you go about doing
these things. Reduce the number of database transactions and move
queries to stored procedures. Look for ways around other external
processes like cfhttp, cfftp, cfmail, cfpop, image processing and so on.
If you can make these processes asynchronous, do so. Remove or replace
any CFX tags. Make sure you have all the CFMX patches (though I don't
recommend the post-6.1 updater, we had some sqlserver driver problems).
Turn on cfm page caching options. Begin caching queries wherever possible.
good luck
-nathan strutz
http://www.dopefly.com/
JB McMichael wrote:
> I am currently running CFMX 6.1 Standard Edition with the updater
> installed on a Win2k3 server, with IIS, connecting to a SQL Server
> 2000 db that is on another computer. The web server itself is a
> pretty beefy machine, and it is running one website that is fairly
> complex. The site usually has 200 to 300 concurrent users and
> averages about 500,000 page views a day.
>
> To me, this seems like a reasonable amount of traffic for a single
> server to handle. But I am seeing, what I perceive to be, slow
> response times on most of the pages. Myself and the other developers
> have gone through each page on the site and optimized all of the cf
> and sql and html as much as we can, and things have only improved
> slightly.
>
> I was wondering if switching to CF Enterprise would make a difference?
> Or, if a switch to Enterprise with a different backend, besides JRun,
> would be faster? Or should I put the money into a new web server or
> 2, and start running a load balanced site?
>
> I am pretty sure that SQL Server is not the culprit in all of this.
> Its average time to return a query, at least according to the CF
> performance monitor, is around 35 msec. And IIS doesn't seem to be at
> fault since we are timing the CF code itself, and I can see that it is
> slow. And like I said earlier, we have gone through the code line by
> line pruning and tweaking, so I don't think (or I am hoping it isn't)
> the code is to blame.
>
> So I am left with it either being a hardware issue, or I am hitting
> the limits of CF Standard Edition.
>
> Thanks for any help you can give,
> JB McMichael
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
