Dave, You're correct )as far as I know) with the CF side. But the application pools are just as important for CF (in my mind at least) to protect those applications from others that may go wild.
We have multiple sites on a couple of servers. I sort out the sites into pools of like architecture: Pools for: static sites, asp., .net, CF Then put the sites in the respective pools, and if needed into their isolated pools if they need to be that isolated. So now if some ASP, or .net things go nuts, they don't affect my CF by crashing the whole W3SVC. If they were going to consume a bunch of memory and slow everything else down, now they won't. That to me is one of the best things, so while CF is pretty much not running in the process space, being able to isolate the other apps protects it in case of resource shortage, etc. Bill -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Watts Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 10:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [CFCDev] IIS 6 VS Apache on Win > In IIS 5, all of the code that IIS server ran in usermode > (html, cfm, etc etc etc) Windows has 2 memory spaces (user > and kernel) and now all user written code runs in user mode, > so poorly written cfm won't nexessarily take down the > machine. Now IIS 6 itself uses http.sys which runs in kernel > mode. Http.sys itself doesn't execute any code not written by > Microsoft, so if you have a page with crummy code that > crashes the application it is in, http.sys is in a completely > separate space and can just continue on. > > Now you have application pools, so each application can be in > it's own "pool" completely separate from the other > applications, so it is not affected by other web applications > that may crash etc. In the application pools you can limit > the maximum amount of memory, when to recyle all the worker > processes so the application and memory is refreshed (either > by time or by number of requests). You can specify separate > user accounts for each pool to run under. You can have IIS > automatically disable the application if X amount of worker > processes fail. While I like IIS 6 a lot, and prefer it to IIS 5, I think it's worth pointing out that most of the things you mention above don't materially affect CF sites, generally. If you're using CF exclusively, or even just heavily, it doesn't matter whether IIS itself keeps running if CF doesn't. In my experience, CF crashes rarely affect IIS 5's ability to serve static pages anyway. In addition, application pooling doesn't affect CF either, since your CF application isn't actually running within the IIS process space or within an application pool. All that runs there is the ISAPI extension, which just passes the request to the CF service itself. But yeah, in general, IIS 6 is very nice! I especially like the idea of ISAPI wildcard extensions, rather than ISAPI filters, for processing arbitrary URL patterns without risking buffer overflows within the SYSTEM security context. At least, that's my understanding about how it works - I'm no expert on ISAPI, that's for sure. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ phone: 202-797-5496 fax: 202-797-5444 ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
