Is anyone using version 15.1.2 for a live website at the moment? If so, would you mind sharing your experiences? Are you having any performance issues while adding content in WCM? If so, can you provide some details about what they are and what you have tried to resolve them?
WCM being used for a live website
Have you been able to do
On January 6th, 2010 Carolyn Mize says:
Have you been able to do anything to make improvements? If so, what has worked or not worked? Are you using a custom template or one of the template gallery templates? Do you have any other custom work--iparts, etc.? Just curious, are you an iMIS reseller or someone who uses WCM to manage a website?
We have tried tweaking all
On January 6th, 2010 Steve Russell says:
We have tried tweaking all of the asp settings. Timeouts, app pool settings, etc. I swear we have tried every combination of everything suggested in the iMIS docs and all the google searches we could think of and nothing helped. I could be more specific but I would have to hit my notes and spend a considerable amount of time going through it all - which I can do if you really need it.
We are an AiSP and have several clients running sites on 15.1 and 15.2. I will admit that out of 5 clients using 15.1.1 and 15.1.2, only one experiences the excesive problems described above. We have not been able to pin-point the exact cause of their problems. They are using a pre-defined template from the template gallary as is another client that is not having any problems. Our other clients are using their own custom pages. This particular client is running on a virtual server running Windows 2k8 Server and IIS 7 whereas the others are running on dedicated servers running Windows 2k3 Server and IIS6, but we haven't been able to completely indentify that as the issue.
To clarify, the client who
On January 7th, 2010 Carolyn Mize says:
To clarify, the client who has the problems is the one running on the virtual server running Windows 2008 Server and IIS 7, correct? We are running our client in the same environment. We have not yet gone live with their website. Based on your experience, would it be worth changing them and sticking with Windows 2003 Server and IIS6 before we go live with the site? Thank you for you comments on this.
That is correct. But this
On January 7th, 2010 Steve Russell says:
That is correct. But this vm server also hosts their application and database currently. They are not fully live yet. That is a whole other story.
I would stop short of suggesting you make any decisions based upon this experience, but I, myself, would be gun shy about pushing another client live on this configuration. But, we moved this client from Win 2k3 and IIS6 to this new setup BECAUSE they had so many problems on that platform - but that was a shared server. We moved them to this environment to isolate them and give them their own machine. This partucilar client is so soured on iMIS right now that I would not be a bit surprised if they switched to someone else soon. This makes me long for the good ole days of Pascal and Cobal and the good ole character based green screens.
We have a site that is
On January 11th, 2010 Andie Millet says:
We have a site that is working pretty decent. I had to do a few things though to get a good response time. The site is www.flvma.org
Thanks,
Andie
Went back to Windows 2003 and IIS6
On January 12th, 2010 Carolyn Mize says:
We went back tp Windows 2003 and IIS6 and most of the problems seem to have gone away. We also rebuilt the site completely by exporting all the content, completely removing it from WCM and the database, and reimporting it. Since we did all these things, the response has been good, and we are not getting errors now.
Suggestion
On January 20th, 2010 JamieDraper says:
We were having similar issues on a Windows 2k8 server and I discovered the windows reporting service was using up a minimum of 50% of the cpu resources, and went higher when any content was published. Once that was disabled, the performance improved dramatically.
How did you get it disabled
On January 20th, 2010 Steve Russell says:
How did you get it disabled permanently? We have tried to disable this numerous times and it keeps coming back.
The problems we have seen
On January 11th, 2010 Steve Russell says:
The problems we have seen aren't necessarily around the published live site, but rather publishing and working within WCM. That's not to say that we don't have any issues on the site, but not bad compared to working on the site. For example, first thing in the am, the site response time is reasonable. Less than 10 seconds to load the site on average. Once the first person updates and publishes content response time drops to over 45 seconds to load the site and that is a conservative estimate. We have to recycle the app pool and/or restart the web to get back to decent response times.
Yes yes yes. Thank
Yes yes yes. Thank goodness there is someone else out there with the same problems! 15.1.1 was just as bad. Response is pretty good until someone publishes something then it all falls apart - 45 ot 90 seconds to load a page. Timeouts all over the place.