1

I am working on a project where the SQL server database will be hosted in the USA but the IIS server(s) will be in England(but this can be changed) with the web app primarily accessed from England. If anybody has links or other resources on optimizing a cross country setup that would be appreciated. Thank you.

user142253
  • 494
  • 1
  • 6
  • 16
  • It will be easier to suggest something if you provide more details, like is it ASP.NET, how much dynamic content it have, what kind of web app, etc. – cyberj0g May 26 '15 at 16:41
  • Based on my limited experiences it is better to have all the servers together. Browsers are better optimized for high latency situations than database applications which might require a lot of back-and-forth. – Necreaux May 26 '15 at 16:42
  • I am going to keep the IIS servers and SQL servers in the same place. I am looking into and Application Delivery Controller(netscaler?) working with a Web Accelerator and a very high speed connection. – user142253 May 27 '15 at 15:32
  • We will be using a combination of C#, .Net and some Java running on IIS servers. – user142253 Dec 30 '15 at 19:40

1 Answers1

0

From my experience this will increase the latency quite a bit. There may be an alternative such as setting up a replicated database across locations. This way when a change is made in one location is is replicated across all different locations. Alternatively if you find that you are using a lot of queries, you can use stored procedures to retrieve the data.

Here are some more details:

Split server recommendations: Install a gigabit LAN between servers. Optimised queries to run as stored procedures instead Optimise queries to only return the minimum amount of data. Make sure interserver addressing uses the IP address or effective DNS lookup. Give the SQL loads of memory sufficient for temporary results.

Source: Should SQL Server be on the same machine as your IIS installation?

Community
  • 1
  • 1