"dm3281" wrote:

> Hi all --
>
> We currently have an ecommerce application installed on a W2K Advanced
> server running .NET 1.1.
>
> In November, I installed .NET 2.0 in order to allow a Windows Forms
> application I wrote to be run on the server for extracting system
> information.
>
> We have recently had an issue with our ecommerce application where we would
> experience high CPU utilization and customers would begin calling in to
> complain about slow response  After looking into our EventLogs and audit
> logs for our ASP.NET 1.1 apps, I would have a bunch of SOAP error messages
> and connection fails, etc.
>
> From my understanding of the application, when users log into our website,
> we also access a third party's website at the same time using SOAP.
>
> We later found out that third party had changed their IP address via DNS and
> our firewall was blocking our servers outbound connection.  We were
> basically down over the weekend until Monday afternoon until we realized the
> problem.
>
> We then made the necessary firewall change and flushed the DNS cache.  We
> started receiving the correct IP address.
>
> However, we were still experiencing some issues -- especially with something
> internal to our application.  It somehow displays a hyperlink to the end
> user to our third party based on some condition.  I'm not exactly sure what
> that condition is.  But...
>
> Our IT department that wrote the software is blaming the issues that we have
> been having from having the .NET 2.0 framework installed.  This was likely
> because the EventLog reports a message about "Unable to access Shim
> Database..." message.  According to Microsoft KB, this is a known issue and
> has to do with read/write access to the registry.  There is a hotfix, but I
> never applied, since it appeared not to be an issue for us.  Anyway, the IT
> folks finally removed .NET 2.0 and the application and hyperlinks began
> working correctly again.
>
> All of the applications were configured to use ASP.NET 1.1 framework with
> Internet Service Manager.
>
> I'm currently debating with our IT folks that the problem was not related to
> have 2.0 installed (it has been installed since last November!) and it was a
> coincendence that application started working.
>
> They are also telling me that they have seen "strange things happen" when
> the 2.0 framework is installed on ecommerce servers running their
> applications.  I cannot get them to define strange... but this sounds like
> copout.
>
> From my basic understanding  of .NET and writing a few programs in C# using
> Forms and ASP.NET, I see no incompatibility issues with having both
> frameworks installed side-by-side.
>
> Isn't this the very essence of having a separate distributable runtime for
> each release?  So you don't break existing applications?
>
> I've basically been banned from re-installing 2.0 on our web server because
> of this incident.
>
> I think this is totally ridiculous and cannot receive any concrete facts as
> to what strange problems they experience and how the 2.0 framework messes up
> their application.  To me it seems like an easy answer.
>
> I know the root cause has to do with their SOAP access to the vendor and
> somehow when DNS does not resolve or there is a connectivity issue, it
> causes the server to get bogged down due to the volume of logins that occur
> with mutiple sessions attempting to do the same thing.
>
> They have no response as of yet.
>
> Does anyone have any opinions on this issue?
>
> Can .NET 1.1 and 2.0 apps co-exist without issues????
>
> ....irate in IT land!
>
>
>
>
>

"Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromberg@yahoo.nospammin.com> wrote in message
news:DE18F263-4D4B-4C93-AF0C-4BA10E09A5C3@microsoft.com...
> dm3281,
> As far as I can tell, since our organization has both 1.1 and 2.0
> Framework
> ASP.NET applications running off the same IIS instance, they can co-exist
> quite peacefully.
> The most important thing I can recommend is that you should have 2.0 apps
> and 1.1 apps assigned to separate appPools in IIS. Otherwise, as long as
> the
> scriptmaps for a particular application are set to the correct framework.
> I
> haven't seen any such issues.
>
> It's easy to point blame on something due to lack of knowledge or
> experience.
>
> In a few cases, it is something completely unrelated that is actually
> causing the problem.
>
> So, tell your IT folks to be more specific about documenting exactly what
> their issue is.
> Peter
>
> --
> Co-founder, Eggheadcafe.com developer portal:
> http://www.eggheadcafe.com
> UnBlog:
> http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> "dm3281" wrote:
>
>> Hi all --
>>
>> We currently have an ecommerce application installed on a W2K Advanced
>> server running .NET 1.1.
>>
>> In November, I installed .NET 2.0 in order to allow a Windows Forms
>> application I wrote to be run on the server for extracting system
>> information.
>>
>> We have recently had an issue with our ecommerce application where we
>> would
>> experience high CPU utilization and customers would begin calling in to
>> complain about slow response  After looking into our EventLogs and audit
>> logs for our ASP.NET 1.1 apps, I would have a bunch of SOAP error
>> messages
>> and connection fails, etc.
>>
>> From my understanding of the application, when users log into our
>> website,
>> we also access a third party's website at the same time using SOAP.
>>
>> We later found out that third party had changed their IP address via DNS
>> and
>> our firewall was blocking our servers outbound connection.  We were
>> basically down over the weekend until Monday afternoon until we realized
>> the
>> problem.
>>
>> We then made the necessary firewall change and flushed the DNS cache.  We
>> started receiving the correct IP address.
>>
>> However, we were still experiencing some issues -- especially with
>> something
>> internal to our application.  It somehow displays a hyperlink to the end
>> user to our third party based on some condition.  I'm not exactly sure
>> what
>> that condition is.  But...
>>
>> Our IT department that wrote the software is blaming the issues that we
>> have
>> been having from having the .NET 2.0 framework installed.  This was
>> likely
>> because the EventLog reports a message about "Unable to access Shim
>> Database..." message.  According to Microsoft KB, this is a known issue
>> and
>> has to do with read/write access to the registry.  There is a hotfix, but
>> I
>> never applied, since it appeared not to be an issue for us.  Anyway, the
>> IT
>> folks finally removed .NET 2.0 and the application and hyperlinks began
>> working correctly again.
>>
>> All of the applications were configured to use ASP.NET 1.1 framework with
>> Internet Service Manager.
>>
>> I'm currently debating with our IT folks that the problem was not related
>> to
>> have 2.0 installed (it has been installed since last November!) and it
>> was a
>> coincendence that application started working.
>>
>> They are also telling me that they have seen "strange things happen" when
>> the 2.0 framework is installed on ecommerce servers running their
>> applications.  I cannot get them to define strange... but this sounds
>> like
>> copout.
>>
>> From my basic understanding  of .NET and writing a few programs in C#
>> using
>> Forms and ASP.NET, I see no incompatibility issues with having both
>> frameworks installed side-by-side.
>>
>> Isn't this the very essence of having a separate distributable runtime
>> for
>> each release?  So you don't break existing applications?
>>
>> I've basically been banned from re-installing 2.0 on our web server
>> because
>> of this incident.
>>
>> I think this is totally ridiculous and cannot receive any concrete facts
>> as
>> to what strange problems they experience and how the 2.0 framework messes
>> up
>> their application.  To me it seems like an easy answer.
>>
>> I know the root cause has to do with their SOAP access to the vendor and
>> somehow when DNS does not resolve or there is a connectivity issue, it
>> causes the server to get bogged down due to the volume of logins that
>> occur
>> with mutiple sessions attempting to do the same thing.
>>
>> They have no response as of yet.
>>
>> Does anyone have any opinions on this issue?
>>
>> Can .NET 1.1 and 2.0 apps co-exist without issues????
>>
>> ....irate in IT land!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

> After installing framework 2.0, you might want to double check that the 
> web application isn't set to run as 2.0.  There should be a new ASP.NET 
> tab in the web application properties.
>
> I believe there are cases where upgrading to 2.0 will auto upgrade web 
> application and you then have to use /noaspupgrade when installing 
> framework 2.0
>
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/sxkaek9b.aspx
>