we have a dedicated server down in London on a 100Mbit connection pretty well on the backbone so we're happy with performance there. The web server hosts our websites and some of our customers'. We don't expect to be much beyond 20 or 30 sites on there for the next year, most of which only get up to a few hundred visitor sessions a day.
Most of our sites use SQL server for data serving and at the moment we take advantage of a shared SQL server with our ISP's at only about £15 ($25) per month for 20MB storage. It was ok at first, but now the shared sql server has about 140 users/databases on there along with ours and I'm getting a bit worried about performance. We have got a full licensed copy of SQL server 2000 that we can install on our dedicated server, but I've heard there could be several performance issues with IIS on there already and, after all, the machine is meant to be primarily a web server.
My question is this: is the performance going to be worse if we stay on the shared SQL server with 140 other databases or should we take the performance hit on our web server and have our own data server installed on our web server?