IIS and SQL server on same/separate servers

[saroyal]

I have some ASP sites that connect to SQL datbases. Is there any short answer on whether it is better to have IIS and SQL server on the same server or separate servers?

In our company one guy proposes the same server to reduce network traffice but others want separate servers as it suppose to provide better performance.

simon

 

[palbano]

there is no single answer to the question. it depends on the use model. u would have to profile the amount of network traffic in comparison to the amount of processor usage to determine wherein lies the greater overhead. -There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't-

-pete

 

[GiaBetiu]

SQL server is a resource intensive application. IIS when has a lot of requests can also be overloaded.
Security levels are also different. SQL server is considered a back-end server, and web server is a front end.
If the traffic on the wire (IIS-SQL) is too big then you will not solve anything if you will have the database locally (on IIS server). Because that traffic actually means CPU utilization, I/O utilization.
If you think that it will affect the network traffic, then don't be afraid as long as you have a swith between them (I'm sure that is not a hub).
Also, speaking about models, this is a multi-tier model. Multi-tier brings flexibility.
Or, what if the traffic to your IIS is rising to high values, and you will be force to split the traffic, using Network Load Balancing (NLB) or RoundRobinDNS?

Well, these were few reasons for why to use a separate server. Of course, depends on your needs, depends on the future growing of that project, etc. Gia Betiu
giabetiu@chello.nl
Computer Eng. CNE 4, CNE 5, MCSE Win2K

 

[saroyal]

thanks for the info.

simon