Also, what about if I want to host many sites?  I can see clustering the
sites together by template.  So if Brands A,B and C want a specific layout
or set of components, give them server running on 8081.  Perhaps Brands D, E
and F want a completely different layout / set of components, give them
server 8082.  All sites could on the same repository just as easily (and
probably easier), but I could see it getting out of hand with 80+ sites.

I guess my question is one of scalability.  Is it recommended to have more
than say ten sites on one instance?  And is it better to only have one
instance / physical hardware?

Respectfully,
John


On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:46 AM, John Crawford <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Bertrand,
>
> Thank you for the reply, it definitely makes sense.
>
> The separation was primarily for 1) the main website 2) an administrative
> type of area and then 3) a clients section where they can place orders and
> have access to their private data (transaction handled by application
> server).  The admin area almost doesn't even need to have a backing
> repository (except for the fact that it's gated -- security).  I would just
> rely on the post servlet to handle my writing and the json servlet to gather
> the data.  Another thing, in production, I would want to restrict the post
> servlet to only the requests made inside of my network (in your experience,
> do you find this to be the best solution to protecting the data on live?).
> I could definitely see it being in one repository, just different content
> paths, but thought having separate instances might help with
> performance/modularity (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> In one of David Neuschler's blog entries or articles (I believe thats the
> source), I read that workspaces were more for replicas/copies of data (such
> as an author/publish environment), but I have had some thoughts about
> separating domain content in there as well (but haven't due to David's
> posts).  I guess he primarily wants to eliminate as much overhead as
> possible, so perhaps thats the reason for his statement and it seemed to
> align with your suggestions below as well.
>
> Thank you again.
>
> Respectfully,
> John
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:37 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:09 AM, John Crawford <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I'm in the process of implementing a site that is basically comprised of
>> > three independent modules, however, I want them to interact on some
>> level....
>>
>> > ...I'm trying to decide if it's best practice to have one repository
>> with 3
>> > different workspaces (which will need to interact) or if it's better to
>> have
>> > multiple repos with different RMI ports (thus, non-standard).
>>  Eventually, I
>> > may have these on separate machines, but certainly no need at this
>> time....
>>
>> I'd start by even questioning the need for separate workspaces...the
>> content of your three modules might simply be under separate paths in
>> a single repository, and you can use sling resource types to
>> differentiate between them.
>>
>> Next step, if you really need it, might be to have each module in its
>> own workspace. This would require less coordination between the teams
>> designing each module, and might make it easier to manage strict
>> separation of access rights, but apart from that I'm not sure what the
>> advantages are.
>>
>> Interaction between the modules can be much easier with a single
>> workspace. Using JCR observation on repository subtrees works quite
>> well for inter-module communications.
>>
>> I don't usually see a need at the application level for separate
>> repositories, the need might come from environment / admin / security
>> requirements, but if you can avoid that it's probably easier.
>>
>> > ...Also, is there any other gotchas or good practices I should follow in
>> this
>> > area during my implementation?...
>>
>> Not sure what you mean by "this area", but the choice of a single or
>> multiple workspaces will have a big impact on your code.
>>
>> Hope this helps, and if not feel free to ask, maybe with a bit more
>> details about your requirements.
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>
>

Reply via email to