Re: [WebDNA] Just drop the Server version
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2015
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 112099
interpreted = N
texte = I am not sure that sharing databases across several websites is good for =security, or even that it is a common practice for the php/mysql users. =It is used by some WebDNA developers because they find convenient to =share the same resources among their customers on the very same server, =meaning that they are in charge of their customers web hosting.Process isolation is a much better option, insuring that if a website =gets compromised, this would not affect the integrity of the other =websites, because there is no access to other=92s databases, loaded in =RAM or not, or other=92s files. It is much easier to "lock" a user in =its own space. The less resources WebDNA shares between websites, the =better the security.Also, there is a project to add WebDNA capabilities to work with several =servers: a front-end WebDNA server for data processing and a back-end =WebDNA server for databases. Give us some time :-)- chris> On 11 Feb 2015, at 06:01, Brian Burton
wrote:>=20> Getting rid of the server version makes WebDNA a less attractive =language.=20>=20> Let me explain. WebDNA=92s databases system is very easy to use for =web programmers of simple to moderate web sites. It starts to fall off =the rails a little as web projects get bigger, but for those of us that =love the simplicity of WebDNA, we find ways to make it work (using the =globals folder to have path agnostic databases, sharding databases to =make them small and speedy, etc)=20>=20> My understanding of the FCGI is it starts a process and loads into =memory the databases it needs for 1 domain(website). Multiple instances =of the FCI to support multiple front ends for one set of databases (via =a shared universal globals folder (is that even possible with the FCGI?) =would cause all sorts of data inconsistency problems.=20>=20> Brian B. Burton>=20>=20>> On Feb 10, 2015, at 10:01 AM, Kenneth Grome =wrote:>>=20>> Hi tom,>>=20>> Fortunately you have a brand new Server version 8.0.2 that works>> for you now, and I suspect that this version will hold you for>> another 5-10 years, even if no new Server version were ever>> developed or released, correct?>>=20>> Another issue here is that if WSC would make "^" work in the>> FastCGI version (the way it works in the Server version) you'd be>> able to run the FastCGI version for your CMS, correct?>>=20>> When I suggested no more development on the Server version I was>> offering a supporting option for Chris' goal when he said:>>=20>> "We want to keep things as simple as possible.">>=20>> One way to dramatically simplify WSC's software development work>> (and save a ton of money) is to stop developing all versions>> except one. And since the FastCGI version runs on the most>> popular servers on the web these days, it would seem to "make>> sense" to continue to develop only the FastCGI version.>>=20>> I think Chris has finally gotten WSC back on-track for success>> again. We are certainly seeing more development now than during>> the previous two or three years! I would hate to see all this new>> development 'disappear' because the company tries to stretch their>> resources too thin.>>=20>> This is a hard decision, I know, but sometimes hard decisions must>> be made in order for a company to survive. And I for one would>> like to see the company not just survive but thrive!>>=20>> Regards,>> Kenneth Grome>> WebDNA Solutions>> http://www.webdnasolutions.com>> Web Database Systems and Linux Server Management>=20> ---------------------------------------------------------> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to> the mailing list .> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
I am not sure that sharing databases across several websites is good for =security, or even that it is a common practice for the php/mysql users. =It is used by some WebDNA developers because they find convenient to =share the same resources among their customers on the very same server, =meaning that they are in charge of their customers web hosting.Process isolation is a much better option, insuring that if a website =gets compromised, this would not affect the integrity of the other =websites, because there is no access to other=92s databases, loaded in =RAM or not, or other=92s files. It is much easier to "lock" a user in =its own space. The less resources WebDNA shares between websites, the =better the security.Also, there is a project to add WebDNA capabilities to work with several =servers: a front-end WebDNA server for data processing and a back-end =WebDNA server for databases. Give us some time :-)- chris> On 11 Feb 2015, at 06:01, Brian Burton wrote:>=20> Getting rid of the server version makes WebDNA a less attractive =language.=20>=20> Let me explain. WebDNA=92s databases system is very easy to use for =web programmers of simple to moderate web sites. It starts to fall off =the rails a little as web projects get bigger, but for those of us that =love the simplicity of WebDNA, we find ways to make it work (using the =globals folder to have path agnostic databases, sharding databases to =make them small and speedy, etc)=20>=20> My understanding of the FCGI is it starts a process and loads into =memory the databases it needs for 1 domain(website). Multiple instances =of the FCI to support multiple front ends for one set of databases (via =a shared universal globals folder (is that even possible with the FCGI?) =would cause all sorts of data inconsistency problems.=20>=20> Brian B. Burton>=20>=20>> On Feb 10, 2015, at 10:01 AM, Kenneth Grome =wrote:>>=20>> Hi tom,>>=20>> Fortunately you have a brand new Server version 8.0.2 that works>> for you now, and I suspect that this version will hold you for>> another 5-10 years, even if no new Server version were ever>> developed or released, correct?>>=20>> Another issue here is that if WSC would make "^" work in the>> FastCGI version (the way it works in the Server version) you'd be>> able to run the FastCGI version for your CMS, correct?>>=20>> When I suggested no more development on the Server version I was>> offering a supporting option for Chris' goal when he said:>>=20>> "We want to keep things as simple as possible.">>=20>> One way to dramatically simplify WSC's software development work>> (and save a ton of money) is to stop developing all versions>> except one. And since the FastCGI version runs on the most>> popular servers on the web these days, it would seem to "make>> sense" to continue to develop only the FastCGI version.>>=20>> I think Chris has finally gotten WSC back on-track for success>> again. We are certainly seeing more development now than during>> the previous two or three years! I would hate to see all this new>> development 'disappear' because the company tries to stretch their>> resources too thin.>>=20>> This is a hard decision, I know, but sometimes hard decisions must>> be made in order for a company to survive. And I for one would>> like to see the company not just survive but thrive!>>=20>> Regards,>> Kenneth Grome>> WebDNA Solutions>> http://www.webdnasolutions.com>> Web Database Systems and Linux Server Management>=20> ---------------------------------------------------------> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to> the mailing list .> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us> Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
christophe.billiottet@webdna.us
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Custom WebCat Prefs ... (1997)
osascript help needed (2006)
Ken's Data Manager (was dbQuickView 2.0) (2005)
WebCat2: multiple currency support (1997)
[WebDNA] Alt Web Servers OS X (2011)
[protect admin] (1997)
math on date? (1997)
Exclamation point (1997)
Web Logs (1998)
Lookup Notfound (1998)
turning every 5th line red (1999)
founditems / writefile (2005)
Edit Plus and webcat code library - Gary Krockover (2003)
Bug Report, maybe (1997)
Possible Bug in 2.0b15.acgi (1997)
[showif],[refferer],[include] in errormessages.db (2002)
Entry pages (was: WebCatalog MAJOR drawback) (1998)
Hard Questions ? (1997)
possible, WebCat2.0 and checkboxes-restated (1997)
more info on [setlineitems] (1997)