Hi Aksay:
I don't think anyone can really quote hard and fast numbers to use
because it depends on the type of objects you are keeping in session
state, how frequently you access them, the number of concurrent users,
and many other factors. The only rule of thumb is that using SQL to
store session state will always be slower than keeping session state
in memory.
If your application demands the reliability provided by deploying in a
web farm scenario, than perhaps using SQL to store session state can
be viewed as an additional benefit. You'll have to do some testing and
measuring to see if the performance and throughput is acceptable for
your application.
HTH,
--
Scott
http://www.OdeToCode.com
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 13:21:42 -0400, "Akshay Kumar"
<ak*******@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi All,
I was reading Perforance and Scalability Guide and reading Session State
Management section.
It says use SQL Server when using Web farm .
No where are the metrics and the Why's are msiisng.
The question that comes to mind is :-
1. When using SQL Server or State Server , will the cost of
Network Latency + Serialization + Creation of Session Objects from
Serialized data + bottleneck being 1 SQL Database (when App data resides on
Same server) not be a lot higher then using IN -Memory sessions and using
Stick IP Cookies.
There is no such explanation.
Any of you can throw some light
Regards,
Akshay
