How do you figure this restriction will hurt it scaling wise. I would assume
that the default in creating one worker process per cpu has some advantages,
so I am just wondering what I am losing.
"bruce barker" wrote:
> an worker process uses threads, and these threads will run on more than
> 1 proc. your cms product must use an in-memory cache, that restricts it
> to one worker process. it must be unmanaged memory, or it would
> restricted to one app domain (one web site).
>
>
> -- bruce (sqlwork.com)
>
>
>
>
>
> John Bailey wrote:
> > I am currently evaluating a CMS product. I like the product so far, but one
> > of the restrictions on the product is that it requires that the Windows 2003
> > application pool be restricted to one worker process. They say this is being
> > done to improve caching. (???)
> >
> > My understanding that the way ASP .Net scales is to create one worker
> > process per CPU. If the number of worker processes is restricted to one,
> > doesn't that mean that I am not taking advantage of the other cpus on the box?
> >
> > The only reason I'm familiar with to limit the number of worker processes is
> > to allow inproc session state. I'm not sure what benefits caching could get
> > from this. Any ideas on this so I might better understand what is going on
> > would be appreciated.
>
|
Similar Threads
