IIS7集成VS经典管道 - 它使用ASP.NET多线程？ [英] IIS7 Integrated vs Classic Pipeline - which uses more ASP.NET threads?

问题描述

通过集成的管道，所有的请求都通过ASP.NET传递，包括图片，CSS。

With integrated pipeline, all requests are passed through ASP.NET, including images, CSS.

然而，在经典的管道，只要求对ASPX页面默认情况下，通过ASP.NET通过。

Whereas, in classic pipeline, only requests for ASPX pages are by default passed through ASP.NET.

能集成管道线程的使用产生负面影响？

Could integrated pipeline negatively affect thread usage?

假设我请求500 MB的二进制文件从IIS服务器：

Suppose I request 500 MB binary file from an IIS server:

• 借助集成的管道，一个ASP.NET
  工作线程将用于
  对于二进制下载（是吗？）。


• 拥有经典的管道，请求是
  直接由IIS服务，所以没有ASP.NET
  线程使用。

要我来说，这有利于经典的管道，因为我想尽可能多线程地服务于ASPX页面。

To me, this favors classic pipeline, as I would like as many threads as possible to serve ASPX pages.

我在这里彻底关闭基地？

Am I completely off base here?

推荐答案

如果你看一下在IIS 7的machine.config，web.config中和的applicationHost.config，你可以看到，静态内容供应方式不会改变的时候你的经典和集成管线之间切换。唯一改变的就是映射到asp.net请求是否通过一个管理模块或本机ISAPI筛选器模块。

If you look at machine.config, web.config and applicationHost.config in IIS 7, you can see that the way static content is served does not change when you switch between classic and integrated pipeline. The only thing that changes is whether requests mapped to asp.net pass through a managed module or the native ISAPI filter module.

这可能会影响性能的唯一的事情是，如果你修改默认设置的授权模块，并且你已经添加了处理静态内容的请求时，执行任何自定义模块。而即使在这里的开销大概是微不足道的。

The only thing that could affect performance is if you modify the default settings for authorization modules and any custom modules you've added to execute when handling requests for static content. And even here the overhead is probably negligible.

因此​​，一个更合适的指标是IIS 6 VS IIS 7，我怀疑IIS 7将是明显的赢家。

Therefore a more appropriate benchmark would be IIS 6 vs IIS 7, and I suspect IIS 7 would be the clear winner.

这篇关于IIS7集成VS经典管道 - 它使用ASP.NET多线程？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！