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:
[OT] PHP?MySQL Help Needed (2003)
Break out of a loop? (2000)
I can help! (1996)
Odd Cart Behavior (1997)
[WebDNA] if - combining OR and AND (2008)
[sendmail] questions... (1997)
I figured it out (1999)
New random discoveries? (2005)
Hummm .... (2002)
Emailer help needed (1998)
RE:DatabaseHelper (1997)
PDF Tools (2006)
RE: How much ram??? (1997)
Questions To Answer (1997)
OPEN MARKET PATENTS SOUND ECOMMERCE ALARM (1998)
How To question on setting up downloads (1997)
brain teaser with an advanced search (2001)
Keeping track of revision history, etc. (2005)
quotes and truncating? (1997)
Snake Bites (1997)