RedDot system requirements

[bobbykjack]

Just a quick straw poll: are you running RedDot CMS and MS SQL Server
on the same physical server, or multiple boxes? Any recommendations or
problems suffered with either approach?

Thanks,

- Bobby

[Prasanth Nittala]

 

Hi Bobby,

CMS and SQL Server being seperate servers is the way to go for enterprise standards. Else you would encounter performance issues. This is better from architectural perspective in terms of scalability and extensibility.
 

Thanks,

Prasanth

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Prasanth Nittala

213-814-4163 | www.oshyn.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RedDot CMS Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to reddot-c...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reddot-cms-use...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.

[Gavin Cope]

In a development environment, I've run both on the same box and separate. But in a production environment, the SQL server should always be separate.

Cheers,

Gavin

[ed.kapu...@gmail.com]

I've always heard this maxim, and follow it myself, but I've always
been curious about WHY separating them yields better performance.
You'd think that things would be smoother if the data didn't have to
travel over a network between storage and processing, but I guess it's
not the case.

Ed

On Mar 10, 12:50 pm, "Prasanth Nittala" <pnitt...@oshyn.com> wrote:
> Hi Bobby,
>
> CMS and SQL Server being seperate servers is the way to go for enterprise
> standards. Else you would encounter performance issues. This is better from
> architectural perspective in terms of scalability and extensibility.
> Thanks,
> Prasanth------------------------------------------------------------------- -
> Prasanth Nittala
> 213-814-4163 |www.oshyn.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>

> From: bobbykjack <bobbyj...@gmail.com>
>
> To: "Prasanth Nittala" <pnitt...@oshyn.com>

>
> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:01:48 -0800 (PST)
>
> Subject: [reddot] RedDot system requirements
>
> Just a quick straw poll: are you running RedDot CMS and MS SQL Server
>
> on the same physical server, or multiple boxes? Any recommendations or
>
> problems suffered with either approach?
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Bobby
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RedDot CMS Users" group.
>
> To post to this group, send email to reddot-c...@googlegroups.com.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> reddot-cms-use...@googlegroups.com.
>
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en

> [http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en].

[Keith Bloom]

I think the PageBuilder process and SQL server stamp all over each other for resources on the server, and that Disk IO is the one which gets really hammered.  It may be possible to achieve good performance with two disk arrays in the server and a whole lot of RAM but if you're going down that road you may as well just use two servers for the job.

In fact the publishing process is so heavy weight RedDot recommended we have two RedDot servers.  One for content editing (0 asynchronous processes) and one for publishing tasks (as many asynchronous process as the server will take).  Plus a separate box for SQL.  

Of course I'm sure this had nothing to do with sale of another server licence :)

Keith.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.

[Killingsworth, Chad A]

I’m curious; for those people who have a second publishing server, do you publish on demand or do a full publish every night?

 

We have a lot of content and a large number of CMS users and have never seen the need for a second publishing server.

 

Chad Killingsworth

Assistant Director of Web & New Media

Missouri State University

[Keith Bloom]

We didn't get the budget approval for the second serve. We do a full publish of each project weekly and have one project which takes ~3 hours to publish. During this time CMS goes between very slow and unusable.

That said we also run the SQL server on the same box as the CMS and this will be killing our performance.  We'll be moving this to a separate machine in a month and hopefully this will improve the performance.

Keith.

[Mark Radford]

Another reason to have them on different servers is so that you can
cluster your CMS servers. If you decided to add a second CMS server,
you could have one handle publishing and another handle editor access
(for example). Each server will have to connect to the same SQL
instance, so if one of the CMS servers is the SQL server as well, the
load on that machine will increase a heck of a lot.

Just my 2c worth ;)

Mark

On Mar 19, 1:32 pm, "ed.kapuscin...@gmail.com"

[RedDot in Toronto]

We do publishing on demand pretty much 24/7... if you have downtime
meaning you can afford to do a full publish of your site nightly when
the users aren't updating content than maybe you don't need a separate
publishing server. We have 2 in our setup and it makes a big
difference. Red Dot is incredibly IO bound all those temp files it
writes to disk.... if you can afford to buy licences for a publication
server from the get go I'd suggest you do it. Our setup consists of 3
servers 1 dedicated for database, 1 for just the Red Dot front end
(editorial server), and one Red Dot server dedicated for publishing
and admin tasks. What you'll notice if you work allot with keyword
lists is that once you start accumulating content after your project
has launched tagging/untagging keyword lists becomes very taxing on a
server... if you have to add/remove 300-900 items for each keyword you
add/remove from a list.

On Mar 19, 9:58 am, "Killingsworth, Chad A"

<ChadKillingswo...@MissouriState.edu> wrote:
> I'm curious; for those people who have a second publishing server, do you publish on demand or do a full publish every night?
>
> We have a lot of content and a large number of CMS users and have never seen the need for a second publishing server.
>
> Chad Killingsworth
> Assistant Director of Web & New Media
> Missouri State University
>
> From: reddot-c...@googlegroups.com [mailto:reddot-c...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Keith Bloom
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 8:44 AM
> To: reddot-c...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: RedDot system requirements
>
> I think the PageBuilder process and SQL server stamp all over each other for resources on the server, and that Disk IO is the one which gets really hammered.  It may be possible to achieve good performance with two disk arrays in the server and a whole lot of RAM but if you're going down that road you may as well just use two servers for the job.
>
> In fact the publishing process is so heavy weight RedDot recommended we have two RedDot servers.  One for content editing (0 asynchronous processes) and one for publishing tasks (as many asynchronous process as the server will take).  Plus a separate box for SQL.
>
> Of course I'm sure this had nothing to do with sale of another server licence :)
>
> Keith.

> On 19 March 2010 13:32, ed.kapuscin...@gmail.com<mailto:ed.kapuscin...@gmail.com> <ed.kapuscin...@gmail.com<mailto:ed.kapuscin...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I've always heard this maxim, and follow it myself, but I've always
> been curious about WHY separating them yields better performance.
> You'd think that things would be smoother if the data didn't have to
> travel over a network between storage and processing, but I guess it's
> not the case.
>
> Ed
>

> On Mar 10, 12:50 pm, "Prasanth Nittala" <pnitt...@oshyn.com<mailto:pnitt...@oshyn.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi Bobby,
>
> > CMS and SQL Server being seperate servers is the way to go for enterprise
> > standards. Else you would encounter performance issues. This is better from
> > architectural perspective in terms of scalability and extensibility.
> > Thanks,
> > Prasanth------------------------------------------------------------------- -
> > Prasanth Nittala

> > 213-814-4163 |www.oshyn.com<http://www.oshyn.com>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: bobbykjack <bobbyj...@gmail.com<mailto:bobbyj...@gmail.com>>
>
> > To: "Prasanth Nittala" <pnitt...@oshyn.com<mailto:pnitt...@oshyn.com>>

>
> > Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:01:48 -0800 (PST)
>
> > Subject: [reddot] RedDot system requirements
>
> > Just a quick straw poll: are you running RedDot CMS and MS SQL Server
>
> > on the same physical server, or multiple boxes? Any recommendations or
>
> > problems suffered with either approach?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > - Bobby
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "RedDot CMS Users" group.
>

> > To post to this group, send email to reddot-c...@googlegroups.com<mailto:reddot-c...@googlegroups.com> .

>
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > reddot-cms-use...@googlegroups.com<mailto:reddot-cms-users%2Buns ubsc...@googlegroups.com>.

>
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en>
> > [http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en].
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RedDot CMS Users" group.

> To post to this group, send email to reddot-c...@googlegroups.com<mailto:reddot-c...@googlegroups.com> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reddot-cms-use...@googlegroups.com<mailto:reddot-cms-users%2Buns ubsc...@googlegroups.com>.
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.

[markus giesen]

A second server is a must for international projects where CMS editors
are working on content during different time zones. Otherwise
publishing will always affect the editing.
Once you've started clustering the system becomes very scalable and
definitely more stable than running everything from just one machine.
Again, that is the same with every CMS you use.

Another good reason for the separate SQL server is security, you can
place the CMS server in the DMZ and let the SQL server live within
your local IT environment behind the firewall.
And the last good reason: If one CMS server is falling over due to
hardware or OS failure you can easily swap to another one and just
reconnect to the SQL database.
In the last case I recommend using a netshare for all assets which are
not stored within the database (again, this is another best practice
to keep all moving parts independent)

Cheers,
Markus