By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
432,369 Members | 950 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 432,369 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Application Pool - Worker Process; Idle Timeout

P: n/a
I'm just getting up to speed on Application Pools in IIS6 and I'm wondering
if there would be any good reason to stick with the default value of [20
minutes] for the Idle Timeout value for Worker processes (found in IIS
Manager, Worker Pool Properties | Performance tab). I'm thinking about
setting it to something much higher - like close to 24 hours - so that the
Web sites on my server don't incur the delay when first requested after an
idle timeout (specifically, that delay would be experienced less frequently
and by fewer users because the idle timeout would occur less frequently).

Thoughts? Opinions? Recommendations?

Thanks
Nov 19 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
1 Reply


P: n/a
big reason... memory.. if you are going to put it to a high number watch for
a MAX value, or your pool could drop your server to a crawl.

--
Curt Christianson
Site & Scripts: http://www.Darkfalz.com
Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com
"Gordon Smith" <GS@NoSpam.net> wrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
I'm just getting up to speed on Application Pools in IIS6 and I'm
wondering if there would be any good reason to stick with the default
value of [20 minutes] for the Idle Timeout value for Worker processes
(found in IIS Manager, Worker Pool Properties | Performance tab). I'm
thinking about setting it to something much higher - like close to 24
hours - so that the Web sites on my server don't incur the delay when
first requested after an idle timeout (specifically, that delay would be
experienced less frequently and by fewer users because the idle timeout
would occur less frequently).

Thoughts? Opinions? Recommendations?

Thanks

Nov 19 '05 #2

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.