"barak" <frohlinger@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:443cf9b.0407290951.44b51144@posting.google.com...
> Hello,
> I'm writing a prototype for a web application.
> The architecture is SQL <--> IIS (<-->Browser).
> SQL <--> IIS are communicating through ADO ASP components on one hand,
> and stored procedures on the other hand (no direct access).
> I'm not sure if for this phase I should add an application server.
> If I will add it, it will be on the same box as the IIS.
> The application server can perform data caching and save redundant
> search accesses to the SQL. On the other hand the IIS and Application
> server communicate through XML - which also means a performance
> overhead because of the MSXML parsing we're using.
> I need help because I don't know how significant the application
> server is for the performance of this stage.
> Let's assume that there will be several dozens of concurrent users.
> Thanks a lot.
> Barak.

"barak" <frohlinger@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:443cf9b.0408010319.33c0c0c7@posting.google.com...
> Thanks John,
> But actually that's what I would really like to know -
> how important is the application server?
> Is the IIS using the ADO components & SQL's stored procedures good
> enough for, lets assume, 50 concurrent users?
> Or is the Application Server a must?
> The user will perform multiple item searches from the DB, where the DB
> contains up to 2000 items.
> It seems a fairly light prototype, and i'm not sure the App Svr is
> necessary.
>
> And another question - Is there another way a COM based Application
> Server can commnuicate with IIS not using XML? Are there better and
> less costly alternatives? XML is the only way I know, using the
> IDispatch interface.
>
> Thanks again!
> Barak