quote:

---

> You can not install IIS5 on Windows 2003 Server.
>
> Have you tried to work out *why* the application is performing so badly?
>
> Cheers
> Ken
>
> "Mark" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:116039A6-2EEB-40B4-837E-45D5FD4696CD@microsoft.com...
> : I have been experiencing significant perforamnce problems when moving an
> ASP application from NT/IIS 4.0 to Windows 2003 Server/IIS 6.0. The same
> pages accessing the same database load in 2 seconds under IIS 4/NT, and

---

quote:

---

> 74 seconds when run on a new IIS 6/2003 box with 10 times faster CPU

---

quote:

---

> :
> : I would like to know if I can, and if it would make any difference to:
> : 1) Uninstall IIS 6.0 from WIndows 2003 server, Install IIS 5.0 on

---

quote:

---

> 2003 Server and if things might be any better?
> :
> : vs.
> :
> : 2) just go back to Windows 2000 Server with IIS 5.0 and install them on
> the new box
> :
> : Any suggestions would be appreciated.
>
>

---

quote:

---

>We are aware of a performance issue with IIS6 and scripts that were not
>written to be performant (like ASP, PHP, Perl, etc).
>
>It usually happens when you use a loop construct that is intensively
>printing out something line-by-line. Basically, what's happening is that
>the script is forcing IIS to directly write to the network every single line
>in *individual* network packets instead of buffering them -- which ends up
>wasting a huge amount of network bandwidth. A common cause of this is an
>application looping through a database table and printing out hundreds of
>rows of info.
>
>Basically, the problems always been there within the script code; the
>question is how the web server deals with it.
>
>The following ASP will take a long time to complete, if ever, on IIS6. If
>you sniff the network, you will see 100,000 packets with a single 'A' as the
>data -- a 99.9% bandwidth waste.
>
><%
>Response.Buffer = true
>
>Response.Write ( "Start: " & Now & "<BR>" )
>
>FOR i = 1 TO 100000
> Response.Write( "A" )
> Response.Flush()
>NEXT
>
>Response.Write ( "<BR>Stop: " & Now & "<BR>" )
>%>
>
>
>The interesting thing, of course, is that IIS6 is actually doing what you
>told it to do -- literally -- instead of guessing what you are trying to do.
>Prior IIS versions had buffering implemented at the Winsock layer, so it
>wasn't actually doing what you were telling it to do...

---

quote:

---

> We are aware of a performance issue with IIS6 and scripts that were not
> written to be performant (like ASP, PHP, Perl, etc).
>
> It usually happens when you use a loop construct that is intensively
> printing out something line-by-line. Basically, what's happening is that
> the script is forcing IIS to directly write to the network every single

---

quote:

---

> in *individual* network packets instead of buffering them -- which ends up
> wasting a huge amount of network bandwidth. A common cause of this is an
> application looping through a database table and printing out hundreds of
> rows of info.
>
> Basically, the problems always been there within the script code; the
> question is how the web server deals with it.
>
> The following ASP will take a long time to complete, if ever, on IIS6. If
> you sniff the network, you will see 100,000 packets with a single 'A' as

---

quote:

---

> data -- a 99.9% bandwidth waste.
>
> <%
> Response.Buffer = true
>
> Response.Write ( "Start: " & Now & "<BR>" )
>
> FOR i = 1 TO 100000
> Response.Write( "A" )
> Response.Flush()
> NEXT
>
> Response.Write ( "<BR>Stop: " & Now & "<BR>" )
> %>
>
>
> The interesting thing, of course, is that IIS6 is actually doing what you
> told it to do -- literally -- instead of guessing what you are trying to

---

quote:

---

> Prior IIS versions had buffering implemented at the Winsock layer, so it
> wasn't actually doing what you were telling it to do...

---