I was thinking of using 1 web servers that connect to the web and 1 Database server that just directly conencts to the webserver.

Is this pointless? or would one Dual Athlon server for the entire thing be better ??

It depends on your needs.

This design is usually better performance wise. Also, if you have a significant amount of static documents that do not depend on the database, and there is a high load on the DB server, the static pages will continue to be served well and unaffected by the demands on the DB server.

Anywa, you can always start with a single server for both DB and HTTP and get another one later if needed.

Yeah thats what i was thinking if the DB server overloads then the webserver can serv cached pages

i'd say it's only needed unless you're running REALLY sql / dynamic intensive sites. I know of a couple of places that do this - such as slashdot.org and hotornot.com

Originally posted by neil
i'd say it's only needed unless you're running REALLY sql / dynamic intensive sites. I know of a couple of places that do this - such as slashdot.org and hotornot.com

Don't forget about WHT..


Yeah thats what i was thinking if the DB server overloads then the webserver can serv cached pages


Almost correct.... If the DB load gets too high and it crashes you won't serve dynamic pages.... The only pages you'll serve will be the static pages.... If the server is down then nothing will go in or out of the database therefore no content....