We are not even allowed to give each user a separate IP address on our shared hosting platform. If they have a VPS or dedicated server they get a dedicated IP of course. With IPv6 we can give each user multiple IP addresses and we probably do it per domain or subdomain with IPv6 (when we have it).
-----Original Message----- From: Sergey Shepelev [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: woensdag 8 juli 2009 14:09 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: FW: CouchDB shared hosting So you're not giving each user separate IP address? On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Stream Service || Mark Scholten<[email protected]> wrote: > Please note: > Using multiple IP addresses just because it is easy for users isn't a real > option. If they need to be able to connect to it from another location it > would give a problem (only 1 "public" IP/server, unless we work with SSL > certificates) is allowed by RIPE for as far as I know. With IPv6 this is of > course not a problem. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sergey Shepelev [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: woensdag 8 juli 2009 13:54 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: FW: CouchDB shared hosting > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Noah Slater<[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 01:26:07PM +0400, Sergey Shepelev wrote: >>> > He clearly means programmatic access, instead of via a GUI interface. If >>> > you >>> > had spent any time administrating a shared access computer system, you >>> > would >>> > realise how important this question is. >>> > >>> >>> Script changing http server config and making it reload config is a >>> programmatic access. I had spent quite time administering frontend http >>> server >>> and that's why i'm talking about such scripts. >> >> I'm sure, but your original reply was quite flippant: >> >>> In fact, there is no such thing in the world, that can't be done "with >>> commands, automatically". >> >> Without a lot of experience, it is easy to imagine that there are some >> things in >> CouchDB that cannot be done programmatically. I know that for one of the Java >> based companies I'm involved in, a lot of our back-end systems require >> complex >> GUIs to change configuration settings - which is a total nightmare. > > Sorry for trolling, but overcomplex systems with GUI configurators are > so typical in Java world, sure you should expect a nightmare. :) > >> >>> Because it's the same as if CouchDB would run one database per instance. You >>> just run another thin instance for another database and everything's fine. >>> Multiplexing databases into one instance only makes sense (in my opinion) if >>> we have really thousand of clients per one box and everyone occasionally >>> uses >>> their databases. In that case even lightest instances would fill up memory. >>> Moderate database per box distribution solves this problem. >> >> Each CouchDB server needs to live on a different port, and this sounds >> problematic if you're offering CouchDB instances to paying customers who >> expect >> them all to live on the same port. You could do some complex proxy setup, but >> that doesn't sound trivial to automate. > > Or, on different ip address which doesn't sound that problematic. Is it? > >> >> Best, >> >> -- >> Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater >> > >
