Hi I know the virtual hosting idea has been discussed before, but I don't see any agreement amongst the core developers with regards to the path to take to implement this feature.
I understand that this is an open project, and any of us are free to make the changes to the software ourselves, however, if we really are going to move this direction as a community, it seems prudent to first discuss the options and decide on a direction together. It seems that until we have an agreed upon direction, it would likely be a waste of time to take steps to implement this feature. Specifically, I believe the decision at hand is how to handle multiple copies of the multiple configuration files that are spread around the project tree. Some quick ideas: 1.) Copy property files that are unique: payment.properties - default values payment-metzia-com.properties - metzia's values payment-aid-hearing-com.properties - aid-hearing's values 2.) Create Configuration Folders Move all the configuration files to a new location in the project directory tree. This would probably help the new OFBiz users with setting up OFBiz since they would not have so much trouble finding all of the files that need to be edited. 3.) Move most configuration data into the database This has pros and cons. It makes some things easier, but would be a very large change for OFBiz. A configuration file would be required to define the database connection details. A separate database could be implemented to store all of the configuration information. -- On a related note, a SAP user on the OpenTaps list recently shared another idea that has some merit, adding an instance id to every table in the database. This scheme, of course, works very well in allowing multiple databases to co-exist with little chance of data cross-over, and apparently has worked well for the SAP team. I, however, don't like the idea since every database table has another field, and every query and join are needlessly made more complicated, slowing the application down. Furthermore, it's easier to move complete databases than it is to split and recombine them when moving a customer from server to server. -- Another issue I think we could be discusses is the possible "mating" of different OFBiz instances. It seems like it would be a great if OFBiz were able to have multiple OFBiz instances talk with one another. This is a feature I liked in Compiere. The two most obvious applications were for a vendor relationship allowing one company to see into the the inventory and production of another, and in the accounting of a division, allowing the the accounts to be combined in one of the entities. Combining parties, party groups, and supplier information might also be desirable. Daniel On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 14:22 -0700, David E Jones wrote: > On Nov 15, 2006, at 2:01 PM, Torsten Schlabach wrote: > > > your suggestion does make sense; that's for sure. I got the > > impression that this hasn't been a topic yet as OFBiz has obviously > > not yet been discovered by hosting providers. (Well, it has! We're > > one and we're looking at it.) > > That's not exactly true, though it may seem that way because we don't > support the variety of shared deployment that you have in mind. > > Actually, in the last five years this has probably been discussed > about 2000 times. Okay, that might be a small exaggeration, but > realistically the number is probably about 40-50 and you'll find all > sorts of interesting insights by searching the current mailing lists > at the ASF, and even more on the old mailing list archives at > mail.ofbiz.org. > > -David -- Daniel *-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*- Have a GREAT Day! Daniel Kunkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] BioWaves, LLC http://www.BioWaves.com 14150 NE 20th St. Suite F1 Bellevue, WA 98007 800-734-3588 425-895-0050 http://www.Apartment-Pets.com http://www.Illusion-Optical.com http://www.Card-Offer.com http://www.RackWine.com http://www.JokesBlonde.com http://www.Brain-Fun.com *-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-
