Skip to main content
Known Participant
February 18, 2011
Question

installing ColdFusion and database

  • February 18, 2011
  • 2 replies
  • 1589 views

Hello,

Should ColdFusion be installed on the same server as the database. My notion is that if they are installed on different servers the performance will be slower. Please if anyone has any input on why two different servers is better, please let me know.

Thanks,

Peter

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    2 replies

    Inspiring
    February 23, 2011

    I just went through some of this, and using a single server is still an issue.  We run with a couple of CF servers and a single MS SQL server, but have a client that we wanted to isolate onto their own system.  We put both MS SQL and CF onto a single large (dual Quad CPU + 16gb memory).  Although SQL runs like a scalded {insertanimalnamehere} CF isn't much faster.  We had to tune the max memory for both MS SQL and Cf so that they both didn't try to take over the system. 

    Basically, you have two pieces of software that each try to handle their own CPU scheduling and memory management.  When they are alone on a system then it's just htem and the OS, but put them together and now you start to have situations where they each think they have a resource available (cpu, memory), and the OS ends up trying to sort it out for them.

    If I had to set that box up again I would seriously consider virtualizing it into two boxes to keep them out of each other's hair.  Or just getting a second box for CF, which doesn't need much in the way of disks and doesn't need to be a beefy as a database server.

    tclaremont
    Inspiring
    February 23, 2011

    Owain, my point was that you only have to restore from the backup on ONE of the servers, rather than, essentially, both of them, It cuts your recovery efforts in half, and typically reduces your downtime in the event of a hardware failure. Common sense, really.

    Participating Frequently
    February 19, 2011

    Have always installed CF on a different server than the database. It's

    generally a resource-allocation issue: let high load hit the web server

    and let difficult data requests hit the DB server. Assuming you have a

    good solid connection between the 2 servers, the overall performance

    benefit will usually outweigh the slight uptick in network overhead.

    Owainnorth
    Inspiring
    February 19, 2011

    As above, as long as you have decent connectivity (ie gigabit) between the two servers, it will *always* be faster having the database stored separately (assuming identical hardware etc).

    Inspiring
    February 20, 2011

    I too agree with the other two bods.  Put 'em on different servers, but with a good quick network connect between the two (and with a bare minimum of networking hardware / infrastructure between the two of 'em, too).

    --

    Adam