It's absolutely possible, but it's not necessarily easy. How hard it is 
depends on a number of factors. If you need to bring the database down, 
keeping the site running with full functionality is capital-H-hard no 
matter what. It's not *impossible*, but it's *very* complex, and complex 
means expensive. Running the site in read-only mode while maintaining the 
database would be a lot simpler, but it's still work to do, and then you'd 
probably just get a million support tickets from people who are wondering 
why the heck the site doesn't work as it should. And that's IF you built 
the site to support a read-only mode. If you just keep it as is, people 
will either get errors (that are likely not very helpful to the average 
user) when posting stuff, or the site will just throw the data away without 
telling anyone about it, which is pretty much a capital crime in user 
experience design.
Considering the response times for searches, and how different kinds of 
queries are handled, I'm going to assume BGG isn't using a search engine, 
but in case they do, pulling that down while keeping the site running has 
some similarities with pulling the database down, but due mainly to the 
fact that the database is the primary source of data, it's usually quite a 
lot easier to keep a site running while doing it. You can usually even keep 
making searches, but the index will be stale, so you might get some 
erroneous hits or miss hits for new items. That can be critical in some 
systems, but for BGG it most likely wouldn't matter too much.

If you just need to deploy a new front end (the stuff us users actually 
see), that's easy-peasy to do while the site is running.

*BUT, *this is all supposing that you built the site with these things in 
mind to begin with. Because if you didn't, it might not be possible to 
separate these things without a major overhaul of the codebase. If you're 
really unlucky (which you probably are when you're working with a system 
that's over a decade old and has been developed to a large extent by 
volunteers (which I think is the case with BGG?)), then such an overhaul 
might be more work than just rebuilding the whole thing from scratch.

So, depending on the structure of your codebase, and the nature of the 
maintenance you're doing, the work needed to keep the site running while 
you do it can range from spinning up a new virtual machine and flipping a 
switch in a config file somewhere, to overhauling your whole site before 
you can even begin thinking about it.

So, what I'm saying is, give them some slack ;)


On Monday, 8 March 2010 07:47:47 UTC+1, hskrfn822 wrote:
>
> It should be possible to do updates and system maintenance without
> having to bring the site down at all.  I've still never seen a site
> with this much data and traffic run the it is and on subpar hardware
> and programming.  Not that I could do better, but I could hire people
> that could.
> On Mar 8, 12:24 am, Lacxox <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Isn't it possible to choose a timing for these system maintenances
> > that's not too bad for US and also not a "morning, European time"?
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BGG 
Down" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bgg_down.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to