You mention that IIS hosting is rather "slow" - it depends. How are you loading the config file? Are you using the server garbage collector or the client garbage collector? The TCP channel can only use the client garbage collector, whereas the HTTP channel can make use of the server garbage collector on multi-processor machines (which may make up for the performance difference in the long run). There are also issues using TCP if you are implementing clustering and/or NLB. If you want load balancing "and" performance, then use HTTP/IIS. If you use NLB, you will also have to choose whether to use Microsoft's built-in NLB (which has problems with its own cluster service), or another algorithm. The built-in NLB algorithm MS uses is not efficient as it pings every machine and receives unnecessary ACK packets from all servers in the cluster. Also, it doesn't support multicasting with Cisco routers.
If you are not clustering (or are only using one processor), then TCP/binary is the only way to go for "performance". If you need extreme performance, scrap Remoting altogether and use I/O CP. I have seen many posts where people are saying that TCP/binary is "faster". This is a blanket statement that sometimes just isn't true - it depends on the situation and many different parameters. Test, test, test away... On 8/30/05, Davy J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Binary across a firewall works, I have a custom asp.net app that > streams the MDB database when you call it , and another that streams > back the new mdb when changes have been made. (it was the only way I > could do it due to providers stupid rules, before you all crucify me > :P ) > > it's the http transfer that makes it firewall friendly , as http > opens the port to send and recive from the client, so that the http > connection can pass across the firewall. > > > Davy, > > On 8/29/05, Pardee, Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have this vague memory of reading that the remoting channel you use to > > pass packets back and forth (http or tcp) is independent of the > > formatting of that data (text or binary) and that that meant you could > > use the binary formatter w/an http channel & get something like the best > > of both worlds. Am I making that up? > > > > (That was on .net 1.1 mind you--I believe 2.0 is going to be way > > different...) > > Dave Jones > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > =================================== > This list is hosted by DevelopMentor(r) http://www.develop.com > > View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com > =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
