Re: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" (MSOC)
Tell my managers I have been in the defence industry, but not at the moment. We supply e-learning to customers who need/expect to access it more or less 24/7 - they work shifts. Taking the system down for an entire hour, without warning, would not be acceptable. Five minutes once a week, yes, but any more would be for a big upgrade, not just regular maintenance. Still, if a big upgrade is what we're talking about, then we inform them, give them a weeks notice, and take it down for the day. I'm not doing go-live and full testing in my sleep. - Original Message From: Michael Grant To: cf-talk Sent: Wed, 23 February, 2011 14:45:15 Subject: Re: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" (MSOC) Really. Even banking sites come down for hours of maintenance. I suspect whatever your sites are, your 24/7 with no exceptions is a policy vs. a true necessity. Unless you are perhaps in the defence industry. Live code push? *shudders* On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Jane Williams wrote: > > Our sites run 24/7: we have no maintenance window that size. I bet I'm not > the > only one, either. > > > > - Original Message > From: Michael Grant > To: cf-talk > Sent: Wed, 23 February, 2011 14:21:31 > Subject: Re: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" (MSOC) > > > Only if you roll your changes out while the site is live rather than during > a maintenance window. > Take the site down for an hour at 4am, push your code live and run your db > updating scripts on each db. > It shouldn't really be too big a deal. ~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:342521 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
Re: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" (MSOC)
Our sites run 24/7: we have no maintenance window that size. I bet I'm not the only one, either. - Original Message From: Michael Grant To: cf-talk Sent: Wed, 23 February, 2011 14:21:31 Subject: Re: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" (MSOC) Only if you roll your changes out while the site is live rather than during a maintenance window. Take the site down for an hour at 4am, push your code live and run your db updating scripts on each db. It shouldn't really be too big a deal. On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Jason Fisher wrote: > > The big caveat I will give about have multiple databases with multi-tenant > code is that any change to the shared code has to be reflected in every > single database simultaneously. And that's a challenge and a half. > > > > From: "Rick Faircloth" > Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:58 PM > To: "cf-talk" > Subject: RE: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" > (MSOC) > > I can see both sides on this one very clearly. > > To this point, all I've ever done is develop custom > applications and websites. I haven't sold the exact same > site in 10 or so years of development! > > However, I really want to get away from working > just one-on-one with clients. They can be a real pain. > Some are just downright ignorant and impossible to work with. > (You can tell I've had a couple of bad experiences lately... ;o) > > I'm want to move into developing sites for specific uses, such > as for recreation departments or real estate agents and brokers, etc., > and have them sign up for the site online, choose their template, > put in their content, and, after a free trial period, they pay > their money. If they need support, they can email me. > > If they want functional customization, I'll build a custom function for a > client, > charge them for it, then make that function available to anyone > else using my "SAAS" sites. The customers will never own the sites > and never have the opportunity to "take the code" elsewhere. > > If they want cosmetic or style customization, I can do that > and charge them for it. It will still remain my site and not > the client's site. > > I'll still build custom apps along the way, I'm sure, but I'd > like to start making my work on an app/site pay more than one time. > > However, like you Matt, I may end up going back to individual > customizations, if things don't work out so well on the SAAS front. > I do have some clients who always insist on being absolutely unique > and want to have the "best" site. To those who want to be absolutely > unique, I can sell the template for a few thousand or whatever amount, > and they'll have exclusive rights to use that template, but they > still won't own it. Soon as they stop paying, the template goes > back into the fold. > > I just want to test this approach and see if I can make it work. > > Rick > > PS - when it comes to the database, I'm leaning towards a different > database for each client. I'd hate to have problems with a client's > data and have to parse through everyone else's data to see what > the problem is. Of course, I do have some "common data" databases > that everyone would share...local area info, etc. But I'm currently > still using distinct databases for client-specific data. > > -Original Message- > From: Matt Robertson [mailto:websitema...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:02 PM > To: cf-talk > Subject: Re: Feedback on this approach to "many sites, one codebase" > (MSOC) > > Even though my own CMS can handle multiple sites running off of a > single installation, I don't run it that way. The points brought up > about clients wanting individual customizations and portability fit my > situation. I understand if you are offering software-as-a-service > things change, but for me this turned out to be enough of a headache > that I reverted to separate installs and have never regretted it. If > a customer wants an upgrade, they pay me an hour or two individually > to make that happen. If they want a specific feature that I don't > want to fold into the overall codebase, I can do it - and earn the > money for doing it - without worrying about consequences on 40 other > web sites on the server. But thats a business decision and not > coding. Mentioned just as food for thought. > > For sites for my own company, where presently we have about 36 up and > running and will be at around 60 when we are done, we *do* share a > single codebase. There are no special mappings. Each site has an > Application.cfm that looks like this: > > request.appName="AR_060110_1033"; > request.rootFolder="ARDotCom/"; > request.FQDN="www.mysiteAR.com"; > > > > The common file has some server vars too: > > server.BaseRoot="C:/foo/bar/sites/"; > server.dsn= etc. etc. blah blah > > And thats enough - along with more code in the common > "Application.cfm" - to set up absolute and relative path
Re: Invalid Precision Value from SQL Server & CF9
Surely a bit field will need 0 or 1, not a string? Or was that not what you meant? - Original Message From: Nicki Tabb To: cf-talk Sent: Fri, 18 February, 2011 15:32:19 Subject: Re: Invalid Precision Value from SQL Server & CF9 The default is NO so it always has a value > What is the value of #FORM.LoanerYN# when you try to insert it in the > bit field? > > ~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:342433 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
Re: cf-talk replies
Take a look at the full headers of the message you're replying to, and see what email client you're using when it works (and when it doesn't). Headers of the one I'm replying to now say Reply-To: cf-talk@houseoffusion.com From: "Rob Voyle" I know some email clients (like the one on my phone - grr!) will ignore the "reply-to" and use the "from", which is FA use in a mailing list. Yahoo Mail on Android does this to Yahoo Group emails, and you'd have thought it would have known better. Solution - take the email client out and have it shot. - Original Message From: Rob Voyle To: cf-talk Sent: Thu, 17 February, 2011 16:28:02 Subject: Re: cf-talk replies Hi Azadi I have replied to several emails since then. The original sender has received the reply but not the entire group. Thanks Rob ~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:342387 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
Re: cf-talk replies
This got to me - but in my spam folder :( - Original Message From: Rob Voyle To: cf-talk Sent: Thu, 17 February, 2011 6:42:52 Subject: cf-talk replies Hi Folks I have noticed recently that when I reply to a cf-talk email My email is not showing up in my email box. For example I recently replied to: Pete Ruckelhaus' email Here are my mail headers: From:Rob Voyle To: Pete Ruckelshaus , cf-talk@houseoffusion.com Subject:Re: Using Google Apps/Gmail for CFMail - limitations? Date sent:Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:23:01 -0800 I know Pete got my response because we have corresponded but I haven't seen my original response in the cf-talk. I have had this happen on several of my reply emails to the group. Did the group get my reply and is it only not being sent to me? Rob ~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:342368 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
