Performance problems using ASP.NET 2.0

I have just built my first ASP.NET v2.0 app and have it running on a 3 server web farm that runs several other ASP.NET v1.1 apps. The v1.1 apps run great, but the new v2.0 app always seems to run very slowly when first connecting to the site, even if other users have already visited the site. I believe I have pre-compiled the site, and even if I visit each server in turn to ensure the app has been compiled before hitting the load-balanced url, the site just runs very slowly. On our development machines the site runs very quickly, so the poor performance is a bit of a mystery.

The servers in the farm are running Windows 2003 Server and the machine.config on each server has been updated to syncronize the machine keys.

Check the event viewer to see if the app pool is restarting itself. Some people had problems with the application shutting down and if that's your case then when the app (aspnet) restarts itself the code has to recompile. Any other details that you might find, will help on directing you towards the right path.

hi

are u working with directory. The asp.net 2.0 application restart as soon as the directory structure changes. see the post below

http://vikramlakhotia.com/Post.aspx?postID=6

Hope this helps

Vikram

Vikram's Blog

Did not know that. If that's the case that's a huge bug on asp.net 2.0. It should be reported. Maybe there's a setting on the Machine.Config for the application not to restart when the directory structure changes.
There was nothing in the event viewer for all three servers (relating to asp.net anyway). The slow responses almost feel like every page request is causing the application to be re-built...

I don't know what else to tell you. Maybe you have indexing on and it's getting ahold of the files and thus restarting. Just throwing one out there.

Try creating another app and see how it behaves. If it behaves normal, then the problem is related to your application.

PERFORMANCE QUESTION

I want to built a web page which is gonna have multiple languages. Which one
is the best way ? Using a Xml file to store languages and their
corresponding fields or Using a MS-SQL Database ?
What do you recommend me to have best performance about multilanguage
web-sites?if you are worried about performance, the localized content should be stored
in the cache, which means whether you use XML or a database, the performance
will be excellent.
Karl
--
http://www.openmymind.net/
http://www.fuelindustries.com/
"Savas Ates" <in da club> wrote in message
news:OsYNsoBVGHA.5500@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I want to built a web page which is gonna have multiple languages. Which
>one is the best way ? Using a Xml file to store languages and their
>corresponding fields or Using a MS-SQL Database ?
> What do you recommend me to have best performance about multilanguage
> web-sites?
>
It really depends. For large numbers of records, SQL will far outperform
XML. Parsing XML is a relatively slow thing. If you are going to have 10K
records with information regarding different words in different languages,
XML is going to be slow, and so will XPath.
If you have 200 records, well, maybe it doesn't matter as much.
Also, you can use Access as your database, which is file based, so similar
to an XML file in that regard.
You should look at your situation, and see what works best for you. The key
is to box up all the translation code into some methods, so if you switch
implementations, only those few methods have to change.
"Savas Ates" <in da club> wrote in message
news:OsYNsoBVGHA.5500@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I want to built a web page which is gonna have multiple languages. Which
>one is the best way ? Using a Xml file to store languages and their
>corresponding fields or Using a MS-SQL Database ?
> What do you recommend me to have best performance about multilanguage
> web-sites?
>
File I/O is simple and no network operation needed... But again if you are
delpoying to a server, will it be easy to get deployed and get read access
or read-write for the XMLfile?
personally i will go with DB, if your application is already using a
Database for other purposes.. the reason is updating is easy... or else you
have to find ways to deploy the new XML file to the server... might be
painful sometimes..
if you don't have a DB in the app... do a XML file...
VJ
"Savas Ates" <in da club> wrote in message
news:OsYNsoBVGHA.5500@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I want to built a web page which is gonna have multiple languages. Which
>one is the best way ? Using a Xml file to store languages and their
>corresponding fields or Using a MS-SQL Database ?
> What do you recommend me to have best performance about multilanguage
> web-sites?
>
There is a standardized feature in ASP.NET for binding the text properties
of web controls with alternate content, stored in XML based "resource
files", keyed on the language settings of the user's browser.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms227427(VS.80).aspx
"Savas Ates" <in da club> wrote in message
news:OsYNsoBVGHA.5500@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I want to built a web page which is gonna have multiple languages. Which
>one is the best way ? Using a Xml file to store languages and their
>corresponding fields or Using a MS-SQL Database ?
> What do you recommend me to have best performance about multilanguage
> web-sites?
>
Savas,
Is this real a question. Whatever system your choose is the only moment that
it can be from importance be as the user changes the language. As most use
the by IE returned standard information in what is the language and than a
Cookie if that changes, what is a one time operation. For the rest it is
equal to getting all kind of information.
Just my thought,
Cor
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:22:04 +0200, "Cor Ligthert [MVP]"
<notmyfirstname@.planet.nl> wrote:
in <Okh2caCVGHA.5580@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>

>Savas,
>Is this real a question. Whatever system your choose is the only moment tha
t
>it can be from importance be as the user changes the language. As most use
>the by IE returned standard information in what is the language and than a
>Cookie if that changes, what is a one time operation. For the rest it is
>equal to getting all kind of information.
>Just my thought,
>Cor
>
Well, good that we cleared that one up a bit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, no guarantees, and no c
onferred rights.
Stefan Berglund
Yep, clear as mud (as Cor's posts usually are, from memory).
*mike hodgson*
http://sqlnerd.blogspot.com
Stefan Berglund wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 20:22:04 +0200, "Cor Ligthert [MVP]"
><notmyfirstname@.planet.nl> wrote:
> in <Okh2caCVGHA.5580@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>
>
>
>Well, good that we cleared that one up a bit.
>--
>This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, no guarantees, and no
conferred rights.
>Stefan Berglund
>