0

I am very new compare to experts here. I have read several articles and discuss forums. However I am worry there are some potential risk I cannot foresee. Could you give me some suggestion on the wb application architecture giving following condition?

  • we are using SP2013 standard. 1,000 internal users. No public content.
  • we will use the social feature (My site host), wiki, community site, project and team site template
  • 500GB DB space will be assigned to My site host (each user 0.5GB). 500GB to the else.
  • There will be 500 users at the beginning and another 500 will join gradually.
  • Users will remove/create community, project and team site depends on their need.

Since there is no authentication concern, maybe I should go for single web application approach. However I concern the allocation of content databases.

One content DB have max size 200GB according to MS. If I setup one web application to My Site Host, create 3 content DB under that, and setup 0.5GB size quota, the grow is controllable and planned.

If I have single web application to all of different site collections, the growth of DB size is less-controllable. Let's say I created 6 content DBs under the web application. Since I cannot specific which site collection created on which DB, one of content DB hold 200 x My Site Host (100GB) and a forum unplanned. One day the forum is growing to 200GB size. During the maintenance the 200 My Site Host sites will be down as well...

I have searched on web and seldom discuss for similar situation. Originally I was planning for one web application for My Site Host and the 2nd web application for the else. But I am quite nervous something will not work due two separated app pool.

Please give me some idea. Also please let me know if I missed some existing feature that will help me come over above situation. Many thanks!

Mark

1

I would definitely split the web applications, you do not want all of your web (SP) traffic being handled by a single application pool. You do not need to worry about multiple applications pool giving you issues.

If you created the web application for the MySites and expect a lot of growth, you should add multiple content databases to the web application. SharePoint will use a round robin method to determine in which content DB to add the newest site collection being created. So this will help you to keep your environment maintainable.

Also remember that the content Database does not really have a max size, it is Highly recommended max size, I suggest you stick to it.

SharePoint has a nice feature that will automatically remove unused MySites for you:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc262420(v=office.15).aspx

If those 1000 users will be working with SharePoint actively on a daily basis, you should think of setting up 2 or more WFE servers and load balance them.

  • Thanks for your reply. Our system is 3-tier: WFE,App,DB. In fact I see many people suggested have separated web app however in this article: technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc424952.aspx#section1 , Microsoft recommend single web app and single pool. That's why I am not so sure which one is suitable for my case. – Mark L Mar 4 '14 at 2:11
  • Yeah, you get host named sites and path based sites. Host named site generally uses less memory and run in a single app pool, but the problem with this is, if your application pool goes down (due to bad code, or what ever reason), ALL of your sites are down. So every time you need to create something in SharePoint that requires the application pool to be recycled(a lot like an iis reset), your sites will be down. This can be a long discussion of what you really want / require, but it is something you should decide, and to change it later is a lot of work. – JP Roelofse Mar 4 '14 at 5:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.