Products

Solutions

Resources

Partners

Community

Blog

About

QA

Ideas Test

New Community Website

Ordinarily, you'd be at the right spot, but we've recently launched a brand new community website... For the community, by the community.

Yay... Take Me to the Community!

Welcome to the DNN Community Forums, your preferred source of online community support for all things related to DNN.
In order to participate you must be a registered DNNizen

HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...Some performance numbers about your webfarmSome performance numbers about your webfarm
Previous
 
Next
New Post
11/8/2010 7:02 AM
 
Lars Tungen wrote:
@Sebastian

I have just started the transition from the "brilliant, fast, production ready and rock bottom solid 4.9.5 version" to the "unstable 5.x alpha crap series born from too much time and funding on our hands, lets start crapping out all features we can think of and see what happens when we don't fix bugs version"  and haven't had the chance to test it out just yet. But I am certainly going to.

 Lars, everyone is entitled to voice their opinion but please try and remain civil - no-one welcomes unnessary swearwords, which is why these forums have a "no profanity" rule at the bottom of every forums page.

Thanks,
Cathal


Buy the new Professional DNN7: Open Source .NET CMS Platform book Amazon US
 
New Post
11/8/2010 7:15 AM
 
>Thomas, AFAIR Cathal was referring to admin options for improving performance.
Okay - it was about the admin options - right.

>this is an educational subject for module developers
I absolutely agree with you.
But - Let us use the standard-installation-binary on the codeplex-server and start with some menus and some html-module-content-pages. No fency extensions. It is no problem to generate 5000 to 10000 characters in the viewstate-field.

>and AFAIK DNN Corp. has this task on its agenda for the next versions
I'm looking forward to it   :)
 
New Post
11/8/2010 7:35 AM
 
cathal connolly wrote:
Thomas,
the setting you refer to is under the host settings->advanced settings->performance settings section. You can choose for page state (viewstate) to be stored in the page (the default) or memory - the majority of the other cms's use a memory model (except those using MVC), but it can be an issue in resource-constrained environments such as shared hosting where there is only limited RAM.

Please note, the user experience team has been examining overhauling areas of UI fixing poor markup (e.g. unnecessary BR tags) and will be looking to disable unnecessary viewstate as part of that by removing unnecessary server controls (though to get true granular control of viewstate asp.net 4.0 is required).

Thank,
Cathal

 
The only safe place to put the view state is within the view (page). Put it anywhere else, and your customers are headed for trouble, The server never knows when the ViewState has expired, so it will destroy it sooner or later. Often prematurely. Your site will become unstable and unpredictable. The most likely victims of this broken feature are users involved in a deep interaction with the site. User registration, purchase checkout and so forth. The kind of users you don't want to offend. Putting the ViewState in server memory will always fail. If not today, it will fail tomorrow when a sudden surge in visits occurs along with your expensive ad campaign or the rare lucky review from a major site. If used correctly, the ViewSate is a brilliant tool for keeping state information with the view. But it is not a data cache. A cache must be able throw out data without breaking the site.

And sorry for the profanity. I will not use that word again.

 
New Post
11/8/2010 7:45 AM
 
@cathal
The other mentioned cms (kentico, umbraco...) are the mentioned numbers with pagestatepersistance set to servermemory? I can't say for sure.

>and will be looking to disable unnecessary viewstate as part of that by removing unnecessary
>server controls (though to get true granular control of viewstate asp.net 4.0 is required)
asp.net 4.0 is installed on my machines. Nice to here this.

Going back to my initial question - are there any numbers about the dotnetnuke.com-Machines.
Since the site-overhaul there is "hosted by MaximumASP" at the bottom of the page. Can you say something about the "old webfarm" which wasn't really old and the new machines.
 
New Post
11/8/2010 8:32 AM
 
mocad_tom wrote:
@cathal
The other mentioned cms (kentico, umbraco...) are the mentioned numbers with pagestatepersistance set to servermemory? I can't say for sure.

 
I don't think these other sites persist their viewstate to server memory. Putting the viewstate somewhere else is an all or nothing option. Either the ViewState is in a hidden field on the page or it is tucked away somewhere on the server awaiting destruction. The other sites you listed had some ViewState, so I think they use the ViewState as it should be used and not as a data cache.  

 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeOur CommunityOur CommunityGeneral Discuss...General Discuss...Some performance numbers about your webfarmSome performance numbers about your webfarm


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of DNN Platform and Evoq Solutions.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:

  1. No Advertising. This includes promotion of commercial and non-commercial products or services which are not directly related to DNN.
  2. No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or other customers to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  3. Discussion or promotion of DNN Platform product releases under a different brand name are strictly prohibited.
  4. No Flaming or Trolling.
  5. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  6. Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.
  7. English language posting only, please.
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out