Re: Separate server for jpg/gif files
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 1998
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 19116
interpreted = N
texte = >At 9:49 Uhr 27.07.1998, Sandra L. Pitner wrote: > I'd be interested in that diagram if you know where to find it. Given that a lowly 6100 can flood a T1 line, it doesn't make sense unless there's a slow DNS lookup issue. We actually use an IP # instead of domain name in our graphics address. Performance to us is much improved because the server is busy with the cgi processing and the graphics are served independently. From what I remember, the client requests the .tpl page, receives it back and then client's computer requests all the subsequent graphics hits. If the client is closer to the graphic server that is far away from the main server, I could understand why there would be a significant improvement. Otherwise it shouldn't make any difference if not bandwidth limited.Is there a flaw with this reasoning? This makes me very curious!Sandy >>If the grpahics server is only serving graphics, no >>fancy processing, etc., it doesn't need to be a powerful machine. > > >Sandy, > >we had a diagram some time ago, published by Starnine. It showed a >significant lower performance if the image-server is on the same network(!) >and slower than the main server. At least with WebStar. >Two different experiences on our site: We had a Mac 9500 as webserver and >ran RushHour on a Quadra 700 with PM-Card. Speed was slower than with just >one server (same network). A couple of months we used a server in the >States for the images and the webserver was here in Austria. That worked >fine. >So I believe the downgraded performance depends on the location of the >servers, local network seemed to be slow if both machines are not of equal >speed. > >Peter > >__________________________________________ >Peter Ostry - po@ostry.com - www.ostry.com >Ostry & Partner - Ostry Internet Solutions >Auhofstrasse 29 A-1130 Vienna Austria >fon ++43-1-8777454 fax ++43-1-8777454-21 >
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
>At 9:49 Uhr 27.07.1998, Sandra L. Pitner wrote: > I'd be interested in that diagram if you know where to find it. Given that a lowly 6100 can flood a T1 line, it doesn't make sense unless there's a slow DNS lookup issue. We actually use an IP # instead of domain name in our graphics address. Performance to us is much improved because the server is busy with the cgi processing and the graphics are served independently. From what I remember, the client requests the .tpl page, receives it back and then client's computer requests all the subsequent graphics hits. If the client is closer to the graphic server that is far away from the main server, I could understand why there would be a significant improvement. Otherwise it shouldn't make any difference if not bandwidth limited.Is there a flaw with this reasoning? This makes me very curious!Sandy >>If the grpahics server is only serving graphics, no >>fancy processing, etc., it doesn't need to be a powerful machine. > > >Sandy, > >we had a diagram some time ago, published by Starnine. It showed a >significant lower performance if the image-server is on the same network(!) >and slower than the main server. At least with WebStar. >Two different experiences on our site: We had a Mac 9500 as webserver and >ran RushHour on a Quadra 700 with PM-Card. Speed was slower than with just >one server (same network). A couple of months we used a server in the >States for the images and the webserver was here in Austria. That worked >fine. >So I believe the downgraded performance depends on the location of the >servers, local network seemed to be slow if both machines are not of equal >speed. > >Peter > >__________________________________________ >Peter Ostry - po@ostry.com - www.ostry.com >Ostry & Partner - Ostry Internet Solutions >Auhofstrasse 29 A-1130 Vienna Austria >fon ++43-1-8777454 fax ++43-1-8777454-21 >
Sandra L. Pitner
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
vs (1997)
[WebDNA] RESTART WebDNA (2016)
OLD ORDERS (1998)
Processing all html files through WebCat or Typhoon (1998)
Another new bug found ... (2000)
Smart caching problems with 2.1b3? (1997)
Problem 2: Prefs file... (1997)
error: Too many nested [xxx] contexts (1997)
RE: [WebDNA] [BULK] SQL ODBC 00000 Error (2019)
WebDNA for Dummies (2003)
Alternating BGColors in Table Rows (1998)
Plugin or CGI or both (1997)
WC1.6 to WC2 date formatting (1997)
anyone have an automated template encrypter? (2000)
Another bug to squash (WebCat2b13 Mac .acgi) (1997)
Version Question (2000)
File upload (2002)
E-mailer error codes (1997)
Read and weep (2003)
OT Flash Stores (2003)