DB and Server in different countries - speed issue?

[aakk9999]

My client is changing hosting provider and are thinking of hosting their site in USA. The database is hosted with their web development provider in Croatia.

Currently, their IIS hosting provider is a different company, but also in Croatia (i.e. both IIS and DB are hosted in the same country but by different providers).

Would move of the application to IIS server in USA have adverse effects on speed of accessing database if a DB is hosted in Cro and server in USA?

The alternative is to host IIS at a different Croatian IIS provider with DB still being hosted by web development company (i.e. still two different companies, but in this case both would be in Croatia).

The application is .NET 3.5

[Ocean10000]

To answer your question it will probably be better speed wise if they hosted in Croatia. If they host it in USA all the database calls will have to cross a very very long distance and this will add a delay.

Why don't they just take the db and move it whee they are moving the website?

[aakk9999]

The client cannot take DB because db is 'owned' by web development company - their setup is such that whoever bought that web dev package must use the same db hosted at web dev company servers. The hosting of actual domain (IIS) can be anywhere though.

Far from ideal I know, but for the moment this is the setup we have to work with.

I was told that db is cached - my understanding is that as the session for the user is created, there is a local cache of the db created for that user on the server that hosts domain.

So unless I misunderstood something, then there would be only the very first hit into db potentially slower? And since db is cached, then there would be no impact for subsequent db reads for the same session?

Or is the delay impact significant enough to ask for IIS physically located in Croatia, even though it would not be in the same physical place nor the same network as the box hosting db?

[Ocean10000]

I can not answer your question. It depending on the caching and how often it will require hits to the actual database and not the cached version.

I know I am asking myself what exactly is this database being used for? And can I replace it with something I can move when deemed necessary.

[aakk9999]

Thank you very much on your reply.

We have the same concerns with the "common db" which is used by a number of clients of web dev. company who bought the same (small business targeted) CMS and eCom package.

I believe the web dev. company originally had a plan to have a platform where all clients that bought their package can "share the product data" and cross-sell each other products and services. This is not happening, but the setup stayed (and perhaps it was also one way of "locking the client" in, not sure).

About a year ago we have been contracted for SEO services by our client, but it is the web dev. company who actually implements client-specific coding changes we ask for.

It is important for our client that they stay on the good terms with their web dev. company and we would rather not rock the boat right now by insisting on a separation of a db in case the web dev. company feels "pushed out" by this.

Again, thanks on answering.