On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications
named "DefaultApplication" ?

Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Thu Apr 06 14:10:09 CDT 2006

You will have one Default Application for every website.
Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each website.

You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.



Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications named "DefaultApplication"
> ?



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by John

John
Thu Apr 06 14:20:20 CDT 2006

Right. But I'm looking at a WS03 box that has two "DefaultApplication"
web-apps in a single AppPool ... trying to figure out how it got that way.

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:%23acIF3aWGHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> You will have one Default Application for every website.
> Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
> website.
>
> You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ===================================
> "John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
> news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications
>> named "DefaultApplication" ?
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Thu Apr 06 14:28:33 CDT 2006

Assigning one of those two Default Applications
to a different AppPool should cover it for you.

Applications will run in whatever AppPool you assign them to.

You *can* have different Websites in the same App Pool,
as long as they're not running different .Net Framework versions.




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:eqxim8aWGHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Right. But I'm looking at a WS03 box that has two "DefaultApplication" web-apps in a single
> AppPool ... trying to figure out how it got that way.

> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:%23acIF3aWGHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> You will have one Default Application for every website.
>> Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each website.
>>
>> You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>
>>
>>
>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> ===================================
>> "John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>> news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications named
>>> "DefaultApplication" ?
>>
>>
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Kristofer

Kristofer
Thu Apr 06 14:51:15 CDT 2006

You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
AppPools for each website". Whether to use one application pool for
multiple websites or one for each website is dependent on a series of
factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you want all static
websites in the same application pool because it will consume less
resources, and a static website is unlikely to crash the application pool.

You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
application pools, and based on that decide to use multiple application
pools or not (in your specific situation).

--
Regards,
Kristofer Gafvert
http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info


Juan T. Llibre wrote:

>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
>website.
>
>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>
>
>
>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>===================================
>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications
>>named "DefaultApplication" ?

Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Thu Apr 06 16:10:04 CDT 2006

re:
> You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different AppPools for each website".

If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.

;-)

Otherwise, sure.



Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
> You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different AppPools for each website".
> Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for each website is dependent on
> a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you want all static websites in
> the same application pool because it will consume less resources, and a static website is unlikely
> to crash the application pool.
>
> You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple application pools, and
> based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in your specific situation).
>
> --
> Regards,
> Kristofer Gafvert
> http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>
>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each website.
>>
>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>
>>
>>
>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>===================================
>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications named
>>>"DefaultApplication" ?



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Kristofer

Kristofer
Thu Apr 06 17:41:16 CDT 2006

Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
server, by using something that do affect the server. It is also perfectly
valid to have applications with the same name, in the same application pool.


--
Regards,
Kristofer Gafvert
http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info


Juan T. Llibre wrote:

>re:
>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different
>>AppPools for each website".
>
>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>
>;-)
>
>Otherwise, sure.
>
>
>
>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>===================================
>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
>>AppPools for each website". Whether to use one application pool for
>>multiple websites or one for each website is dependent on a series of
>>factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you want all static
>>websites in the same application pool because it will consume less
>>resources, and a static website is unlikely to crash the application
>>pool.
>>
>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
>>application pools, and based on that decide to use multiple application
>>pools or not (in your specific situation).
>>
>>-- Regards,
>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>
>>
>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>
>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
>>>website.
>>>
>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>===================================
>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications
>>>>named "DefaultApplication" ?

Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Thu Apr 06 17:55:24 CDT 2006

re:
> It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in the same application pool.

It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.

Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?



Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
> Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the server, by using something
> that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in
> the same application pool.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Kristofer Gafvert
> http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>
>>re:
>>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different AppPools for each website".
>>
>>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>>
>>;-)
>>
>>Otherwise, sure.
>>
>>
>>
>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>===================================
>>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different AppPools for each website".
>>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for each website is dependent on
>>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you want all static websites in
>>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources, and a static website is
>>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
>>>
>>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple application pools, and
>>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in your specific situation).
>>>
>>>-- Regards,
>>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>>
>>>
>>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>>
>>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each website.
>>>>
>>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>>===================================
>>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications named
>>>>>"DefaultApplication" ?



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by David

David
Thu Apr 06 22:43:04 CDT 2006

- Application Pool Names are unique.
- URLs are unique.
- WebApplication Name is not unique. It is an arbitrary "friendly name"
associated with a given URL. It is like Website "friendly name" vs its
Website ID -- Website ID is unique, but "friendly name" is not
- Each WebApplication is serviced by exactly one Application Pool.

Given the above rules, it is conceivable to have the following
configuration:
/WebApp1 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
/WebApp2 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool

This means when you look at DefaultAppPool, you will see DefaultApplication
listed twice, once for /WebApp1 and another for /WebApp2

Why do we have WebApplication Name? It is a convenient form of indirection
for users that want it. However, if it confuses it, sync up WebApplication
Name with URL and you should be fine.

--
//David
IIS
http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
//

"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
news:eqxim8aWGHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Right. But I'm looking at a WS03 box that has two "DefaultApplication"
> web-apps in a single AppPool ... trying to figure out how it got that way.
>
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:%23acIF3aWGHA.3492@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> You will have one Default Application for every website.
>> Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
>> website.
>>
>> You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>
>>
>>
>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> ===================================
>> "John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>> news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications
>>> named "DefaultApplication" ?
>>
>>
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Kristofer

Kristofer
Fri Apr 07 00:23:09 CDT 2006

I still dont understand why you want people to change things that will
affect the server, instead of just explaining the "confusing" thing and
say that there is nothing to worry about.

I will not discuss this anymore. Bye.


--
Regards,
Kristofer Gafvert
http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info


Juan T. Llibre wrote:

>re:
>>It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in the
>>same application pool.
>
>It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
>
>Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
>
>
>
>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>===================================
>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
>>Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
>>server, by using something that do affect the server. It is also
>>perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in the same
>>application pool.
>>
>>
>>-- Regards,
>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>
>>
>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>
>>>re:
>>>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different
>>>>AppPools for each website".
>>>
>>>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>>>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>>>
>>>;-)
>>>
>>>Otherwise, sure.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>===================================
>>>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>>>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
>>>>AppPools for each website". Whether to use one application pool for
>>>>multiple websites or one for each website is dependent on a series of
>>>>factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you want all static
>>>>websites in the same application pool because it will consume less
>>>>resources, and a static website is unlikely to crash the application
>>>>pool.
>>>>
>>>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
>>>>application pools, and based on that decide to use multiple application
>>>>pools or not (in your specific situation).
>>>>
>>>>-- Regards,
>>>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>>>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
>>>>>website.
>>>>>
>>>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>>>===================================
>>>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two applications
>>>>>>named "DefaultApplication" ?

Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Ken

Ken
Fri Apr 07 01:33:40 CDT 2006

Then the correct solution is to change the web application name so that they
don't have the same name. This has no impact on the server. Whereas moving
the application to a separate app pool depends on a proper analysis of the
costs/benefits involved.

Cheers
Ken

--
IIS Blog: http://www.adOpenStatic.com/cs/blogs/ken

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:OonL70cWGHA.4580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
: re:
: > It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in
the same application pool.
:
: It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
:
: Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
:
:
:
: Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
: aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
: asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
: foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
: ===================================
: "Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
: news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
: > Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
server, by using something
: > that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have
applications with the same name, in
: > the same application pool.
: >
: >
: > --
: > Regards,
: > Kristofer Gafvert
: > http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
: >
: >
: > Juan T. Llibre wrote:
: >
: >>re:
: >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different
AppPools for each website".
: >>
: >>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
: >>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
: >>
: >>;-)
: >>
: >>Otherwise, sure.
: >>
: >>
: >>
: >>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
: >>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
: >>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
: >>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
: >>===================================
: >>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
: >>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
: >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
AppPools for each website".
: >>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for
each website is dependent on
: >>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you
want all static websites in
: >>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources, and a
static website is
: >>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
: >>>
: >>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
application pools, and
: >>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in your
specific situation).
: >>>
: >>>-- Regards,
: >>>Kristofer Gafvert
: >>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
: >>>
: >>>
: >>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
: >>>
: >>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
: >>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
website.
: >>>>
: >>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
: >>>>
: >>>>
: >>>>
: >>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
: >>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
: >>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
: >>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
: >>>>===================================
: >>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
: >>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
: >>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two
applications named
: >>>>>"DefaultApplication" ?
:
:



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Fri Apr 07 07:35:02 CDT 2006

Thanks, Ken.

Would there be a rational basis for determining which of
the two "Default Web Applications" should be changed ?

Or, will changing either suffice ?

Also, will changing the friendly name of a "Default Web Application"
imply any operational changes ?




Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"Ken Schaefer" <kenREMOVE@THISadOpenStatic.com> wrote in message
news:Ou5g20gWGHA.1564@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Then the correct solution is to change the web application name so that they
> don't have the same name. This has no impact on the server. Whereas moving
> the application to a separate app pool depends on a proper analysis of the
> costs/benefits involved.
>
> Cheers
> Ken
>
> --
> IIS Blog: http://www.adOpenStatic.com/cs/blogs/ken
>
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:OonL70cWGHA.4580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> : re:
> : > It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in
> the same application pool.
> :
> : It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
> :
> : Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
> :
> :
> :
> : Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> : aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
> : asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> : foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> : ===================================
> : "Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
> : news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
> : > Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
> server, by using something
> : > that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have
> applications with the same name, in
> : > the same application pool.
> : >
> : >
> : > --
> : > Regards,
> : > Kristofer Gafvert
> : > http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
> : >
> : >
> : > Juan T. Llibre wrote:
> : >
> : >>re:
> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different
> AppPools for each website".
> : >>
> : >>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
> : >>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
> : >>
> : >>;-)
> : >>
> : >>Otherwise, sure.
> : >>
> : >>
> : >>
> : >>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> : >>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
> : >>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> : >>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> : >>===================================
> : >>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
> : >>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
> AppPools for each website".
> : >>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for
> each website is dependent on
> : >>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you
> want all static websites in
> : >>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources, and a
> static website is
> : >>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
> : >>>
> : >>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
> application pools, and
> : >>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in your
> specific situation).
> : >>>
> : >>>-- Regards,
> : >>>Kristofer Gafvert
> : >>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
> : >>>
> : >>>
> : >>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
> : >>>
> : >>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
> : >>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
> website.
> : >>>>
> : >>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
> : >>>>
> : >>>>
> : >>>>
> : >>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> : >>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
> : >>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> : >>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> : >>>>===================================
> : >>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
> : >>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> : >>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two
> applications named
> : >>>>>"DefaultApplication" ?
> :
> :
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by David

David
Fri Apr 07 20:51:26 CDT 2006

- Application Pool Names are unique.
- URLs are unique.
- WebApplication Name is not unique. It is an arbitrary "friendly name"
associated with a given URL. It is like Website "friendly name" vs its
Website ID -- Website ID is unique, but "friendly name" is not
- Each WebApplication is serviced by exactly one Application Pool.

Given the above rules, it is conceivable to have the following
configuration:
/WebApp1 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
/WebApp2 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool

This means when you look at DefaultAppPool, you will see DefaultApplication
listed twice, once for /WebApp1 and another for /WebApp2

Why do we have WebApplication Name? It is a convenient form of indirection
for users that want it. However, if it confuses it, sync up WebApplication
Name with URL and you should be fine.

--
//David
IIS
http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
//

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:OYrq6%23jWGHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, Ken.
>
> Would there be a rational basis for determining which of
> the two "Default Web Applications" should be changed ?
>
> Or, will changing either suffice ?
>
> Also, will changing the friendly name of a "Default Web Application"
> imply any operational changes ?
>
>
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ===================================
> "Ken Schaefer" <kenREMOVE@THISadOpenStatic.com> wrote in message
> news:Ou5g20gWGHA.1564@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Then the correct solution is to change the web application name so that
>> they
>> don't have the same name. This has no impact on the server. Whereas
>> moving
>> the application to a separate app pool depends on a proper analysis of
>> the
>> costs/benefits involved.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Ken
>>
>> --
>> IIS Blog: http://www.adOpenStatic.com/cs/blogs/ken
>>
>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:OonL70cWGHA.4580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> : re:
>> : > It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name,
>> in
>> the same application pool.
>> :
>> : It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
>> :
>> : Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
>> :
>> :
>> :
>> : Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> : aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> : asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> : foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> : ===================================
>> : "Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>> : news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
>> : > Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
>> server, by using something
>> : > that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have
>> applications with the same name, in
>> : > the same application pool.
>> : >
>> : >
>> : > --
>> : > Regards,
>> : > Kristofer Gafvert
>> : > http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>> : >
>> : >
>> : > Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>> : >
>> : >>re:
>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup
>> different
>> AppPools for each website".
>> : >>
>> : >>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>> : >>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>> : >>
>> : >>;-)
>> : >>
>> : >>Otherwise, sure.
>> : >>
>> : >>
>> : >>
>> : >>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> : >>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> : >>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> : >>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> : >>===================================
>> : >>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>> : >>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
>> AppPools for each website".
>> : >>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for
>> each website is dependent on
>> : >>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you
>> want all static websites in
>> : >>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources,
>> and a
>> static website is
>> : >>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
>> : >>>
>> : >>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of
>> multiple
>> application pools, and
>> : >>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in
>> your
>> specific situation).
>> : >>>
>> : >>>-- Regards,
>> : >>>Kristofer Gafvert
>> : >>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>> : >>>
>> : >>>
>> : >>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>> : >>>
>> : >>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>> : >>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for
>> each
>> website.
>> : >>>>
>> : >>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>> : >>>>
>> : >>>>
>> : >>>>
>> : >>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> : >>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> : >>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> : >>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> : >>>>===================================
>> : >>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>> : >>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> : >>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two
>> applications named
>> : >>>>>"DefaultApplication" ?
>> :
>> :
>>
>>
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Sat Apr 08 08:49:45 CDT 2006

Thanks, David. I *had* seen your post.

I already knew all of what you're saying, except the last part.
Could you explain how you "sync up WebApplication Name with URL" ?



Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"David Wang [Msft]" <someone@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:%23z2QcIrWGHA.4972@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>- Application Pool Names are unique.
> - URLs are unique.
> - WebApplication Name is not unique. It is an arbitrary "friendly name"
> associated with a given URL. It is like Website "friendly name" vs its
> Website ID -- Website ID is unique, but "friendly name" is not
> - Each WebApplication is serviced by exactly one Application Pool.
>
> Given the above rules, it is conceivable to have the following
> configuration:
> /WebApp1 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
> /WebApp2 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
>
> This means when you look at DefaultAppPool, you will see DefaultApplication
> listed twice, once for /WebApp1 and another for /WebApp2
>
> Why do we have WebApplication Name? It is a convenient form of indirection
> for users that want it. However, if it confuses it, sync up WebApplication
> Name with URL and you should be fine.
>
> --
> //David
> IIS
> http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> //
>
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:OYrq6%23jWGHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks, Ken.
>>
>> Would there be a rational basis for determining which of
>> the two "Default Web Applications" should be changed ?
>>
>> Or, will changing either suffice ?
>>
>> Also, will changing the friendly name of a "Default Web Application"
>> imply any operational changes ?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> ===================================
>> "Ken Schaefer" <kenREMOVE@THISadOpenStatic.com> wrote in message
>> news:Ou5g20gWGHA.1564@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Then the correct solution is to change the web application name so that they
>>> don't have the same name. This has no impact on the server. Whereas moving
>>> the application to a separate app pool depends on a proper analysis of the
>>> costs/benefits involved.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Ken
>>>
>>> --
>>> IIS Blog: http://www.adOpenStatic.com/cs/blogs/ken
>>>
>>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OonL70cWGHA.4580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> : re:
>>> : > It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in
>>> the same application pool.
>>> :
>>> : It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
>>> :
>>> : Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
>>> :
>>> :
>>> :
>>> : Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>> : aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>> : asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>> : foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>> : ===================================
>>> : "Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>> : news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
>>> : > Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
>>> server, by using something
>>> : > that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have
>>> applications with the same name, in
>>> : > the same application pool.
>>> : >
>>> : >
>>> : > --
>>> : > Regards,
>>> : > Kristofer Gafvert
>>> : > http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>> : >
>>> : >
>>> : > Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>> : >
>>> : >>re:
>>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different
>>> AppPools for each website".
>>> : >>
>>> : >>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>>> : >>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>>> : >>
>>> : >>;-)
>>> : >>
>>> : >>Otherwise, sure.
>>> : >>
>>> : >>
>>> : >>
>>> : >>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>> : >>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>> : >>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>> : >>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>> : >>===================================
>>> : >>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>> : >>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
>>> AppPools for each website".
>>> : >>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for
>>> each website is dependent on
>>> : >>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you
>>> want all static websites in
>>> : >>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources, and a
>>> static website is
>>> : >>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
>>> : >>>
>>> : >>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
>>> application pools, and
>>> : >>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in your
>>> specific situation).
>>> : >>>
>>> : >>>-- Regards,
>>> : >>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>> : >>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>> : >>>
>>> : >>>
>>> : >>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>> : >>>
>>> : >>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>>> : >>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for each
>>> website.
>>> : >>>>
>>> : >>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>> : >>>>
>>> : >>>>
>>> : >>>>
>>> : >>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>> : >>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>> : >>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>> : >>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>> : >>>>===================================
>>> : >>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>>> : >>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> : >>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two
>>> applications named
>>> : >>>>>"DefaultApplication" ?
>>> :
>>> :
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by David

David
Sat Apr 08 17:22:25 CDT 2006

Go into IIS Manager UI and change the Application name to whatever you want.

--
//David
IIS
http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
//

"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:eGdVTNxWGHA.2268@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Thanks, David. I *had* seen your post.
>
> I already knew all of what you're saying, except the last part.
> Could you explain how you "sync up WebApplication Name with URL" ?
>
>
>
> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
> ===================================
> "David Wang [Msft]" <someone@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:%23z2QcIrWGHA.4972@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>- Application Pool Names are unique.
>> - URLs are unique.
>> - WebApplication Name is not unique. It is an arbitrary "friendly name"
>> associated with a given URL. It is like Website "friendly name" vs its
>> Website ID -- Website ID is unique, but "friendly name" is not
>> - Each WebApplication is serviced by exactly one Application Pool.
>>
>> Given the above rules, it is conceivable to have the following
>> configuration:
>> /WebApp1 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
>> /WebApp2 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
>>
>> This means when you look at DefaultAppPool, you will see
>> DefaultApplication
>> listed twice, once for /WebApp1 and another for /WebApp2
>>
>> Why do we have WebApplication Name? It is a convenient form of
>> indirection
>> for users that want it. However, if it confuses it, sync up
>> WebApplication
>> Name with URL and you should be fine.
>>
>> --
>> //David
>> IIS
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> //
>>
>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:OYrq6%23jWGHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Thanks, Ken.
>>>
>>> Would there be a rational basis for determining which of
>>> the two "Default Web Applications" should be changed ?
>>>
>>> Or, will changing either suffice ?
>>>
>>> Also, will changing the friendly name of a "Default Web Application"
>>> imply any operational changes ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>> ===================================
>>> "Ken Schaefer" <kenREMOVE@THISadOpenStatic.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Ou5g20gWGHA.1564@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> Then the correct solution is to change the web application name so that
>>>> they
>>>> don't have the same name. This has no impact on the server. Whereas
>>>> moving
>>>> the application to a separate app pool depends on a proper analysis of
>>>> the
>>>> costs/benefits involved.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Ken
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> IIS Blog: http://www.adOpenStatic.com/cs/blogs/ken
>>>>
>>>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:OonL70cWGHA.4580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> : re:
>>>> : > It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name,
>>>> in
>>>> the same application pool.
>>>> :
>>>> : It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
>>>> :
>>>> : Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
>>>> :
>>>> :
>>>> :
>>>> : Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>> : aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>> : asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>> : foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>> : ===================================
>>>> : "Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>>> : news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
>>>> : > Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
>>>> server, by using something
>>>> : > that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have
>>>> applications with the same name, in
>>>> : > the same application pool.
>>>> : >
>>>> : >
>>>> : > --
>>>> : > Regards,
>>>> : > Kristofer Gafvert
>>>> : > http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>>> : >
>>>> : >
>>>> : > Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>>> : >
>>>> : >>re:
>>>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup
>>>> different
>>>> AppPools for each website".
>>>> : >>
>>>> : >>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>>>> : >>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>>>> : >>
>>>> : >>;-)
>>>> : >>
>>>> : >>Otherwise, sure.
>>>> : >>
>>>> : >>
>>>> : >>
>>>> : >>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>> : >>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>> : >>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>> : >>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>> : >>===================================
>>>> : >>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>>> : >>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>>>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup
>>>> different
>>>> AppPools for each website".
>>>> : >>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one
>>>> for
>>>> each website is dependent on
>>>> : >>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment
>>>> you
>>>> want all static websites in
>>>> : >>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources,
>>>> and a
>>>> static website is
>>>> : >>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
>>>> : >>>
>>>> : >>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of
>>>> multiple
>>>> application pools, and
>>>> : >>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in
>>>> your
>>>> specific situation).
>>>> : >>>
>>>> : >>>-- Regards,
>>>> : >>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>>> : >>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>>> : >>>
>>>> : >>>
>>>> : >>>Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>>> : >>>
>>>> : >>>>You will have one Default Application for every website.
>>>> : >>>>Other applications will derive from the Default Application for
>>>> each
>>>> website.
>>>> : >>>>
>>>> : >>>>You should setup different AppPools for each website, at least.
>>>> : >>>>
>>>> : >>>>
>>>> : >>>>
>>>> : >>>>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>> : >>>>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>> : >>>>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>> : >>>>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>> : >>>>===================================
>>>> : >>>>"John A Grandy" <johnagrandy-at-yahoo-dot-com> wrote in message
>>>> : >>>>news:O9iDvyaWGHA.4620@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> : >>>>>On WS03 how is it possible that an AppPool can contain two
>>>> applications named
>>>> : >>>>>"DefaultApplication" ?
>>>> :
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>



Re: 2 same-named apps in AppPool by Juan

Juan
Sat Apr 08 18:14:38 CDT 2006

You mean the "Web Site Identification" description ?

If so, what threw me was the *URL* portion of the phrase :
"sync up WebApplication Name with URL"

I was attempting to find a URL...and striking out.

Thanks.



Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
===================================
"David Wang [Msft]" <someone@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:ukgvx31WGHA.1220@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Go into IIS Manager UI and change the Application name to whatever you want.
>
> --
> //David
> IIS
> http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
> //
>
> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:eGdVTNxWGHA.2268@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Thanks, David. I *had* seen your post.
>>
>> I already knew all of what you're saying, except the last part.
>> Could you explain how you "sync up WebApplication Name with URL" ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>> ===================================
>> "David Wang [Msft]" <someone@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23z2QcIrWGHA.4972@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>- Application Pool Names are unique.
>>> - URLs are unique.
>>> - WebApplication Name is not unique. It is an arbitrary "friendly name"
>>> associated with a given URL. It is like Website "friendly name" vs its
>>> Website ID -- Website ID is unique, but "friendly name" is not
>>> - Each WebApplication is serviced by exactly one Application Pool.
>>>
>>> Given the above rules, it is conceivable to have the following
>>> configuration:
>>> /WebApp1 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
>>> /WebApp2 is named DefaultApplication and associated with DefaultAppPool
>>>
>>> This means when you look at DefaultAppPool, you will see DefaultApplication
>>> listed twice, once for /WebApp1 and another for /WebApp2
>>>
>>> Why do we have WebApplication Name? It is a convenient form of indirection
>>> for users that want it. However, if it confuses it, sync up WebApplication
>>> Name with URL and you should be fine.
>>>
>>> --
>>> //David
>>> IIS
>>> http://blogs.msdn.com/David.Wang
>>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
>>> //
>>>
>>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OYrq6%23jWGHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Thanks, Ken.
>>>>
>>>> Would there be a rational basis for determining which of
>>>> the two "Default Web Applications" should be changed ?
>>>>
>>>> Or, will changing either suffice ?
>>>>
>>>> Also, will changing the friendly name of a "Default Web Application"
>>>> imply any operational changes ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>> aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>> ===================================
>>>> "Ken Schaefer" <kenREMOVE@THISadOpenStatic.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Ou5g20gWGHA.1564@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Then the correct solution is to change the web application name so that they
>>>>> don't have the same name. This has no impact on the server. Whereas moving
>>>>> the application to a separate app pool depends on a proper analysis of the
>>>>> costs/benefits involved.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Ken
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> IIS Blog: http://www.adOpenStatic.com/cs/blogs/ken
>>>>>
>>>>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailreplies@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:OonL70cWGHA.4580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>> : re:
>>>>> : > It is also perfectly valid to have applications with the same name, in
>>>>> the same application pool.
>>>>> :
>>>>> : It's quite valid, alright. The thing is, it's also quite confusing.
>>>>> :
>>>>> : Why would anyone want to have confusing IIS data ?
>>>>> :
>>>>> :
>>>>> :
>>>>> : Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>>> : aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>>> : asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>>> : foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>>> : ===================================
>>>>> : "Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>>>> : news:xn0ekojknefi5l500m@news.microsoft.com...
>>>>> : > Foolish to solve a cosmetic thing, with no affect whatsoever on the
>>>>> server, by using something
>>>>> : > that do affect the server. It is also perfectly valid to have
>>>>> applications with the same name, in
>>>>> : > the same application pool.
>>>>> : >
>>>>> : >
>>>>> : > --
>>>>> : > Regards,
>>>>> : > Kristofer Gafvert
>>>>> : > http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>>>> : >
>>>>> : >
>>>>> : > Juan T. Llibre wrote:
>>>>> : >
>>>>> : >>re:
>>>>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you should setup different
>>>>> AppPools for each website".
>>>>> : >>
>>>>> : >>If the OP doesn't want an AppPool to contain
>>>>> : >>two applications named "Default Application", I sure can.
>>>>> : >>
>>>>> : >>;-)
>>>>> : >>
>>>>> : >>Otherwise, sure.
>>>>> : >>
>>>>> : >>
>>>>> : >>
>>>>> : >>Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP
>>>>> : >>aspnetfaq.com : http://www.aspnetfaq.com/
>>>>> : >>asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/
>>>>> : >>foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/
>>>>> : >>===================================
>>>>> : >>"Kristofer Gafvert" <kgafvert@NEWSilopia.com> wrote in message
>>>>> : >>news:xn0eko2fse9flub00i@news.microsoft.com...
>>>>> : >>>You cannot make a general comment such as "you shold setup different
>>>>> AppPools for each website".
>>>>> : >>>Whether to use one application pool for multiple websites or one for
>>>>> each website is dependent on
>>>>> : >>>a series of factors. For example in a shared hosting environment you
>>>>> want all static websites in
>>>>> : >>>the same application pool because it will consume less resources, and a
>>>>> static website is
>>>>> : >>>unlikely to crash the application pool.
>>>>> : >>>
>>>>> : >>>You will need to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
>>>>> application pools, and
>>>>> : >>>based on that decide to use multiple application pools or not (in your
>>>>> specific situation).
>>>>> : >>>
>>>>> : >>>-- Regards,
>>>>> : >>>Kristofer Gafvert
>>>>> : >>>http://www.gafvert.info/iis/ - IIS Related Info
>>>&g