I'm wondering if my website need to be hosted on a different server for load balancing purposes as picture below:
I'm thinking of installing 3 Kentico Project into each server. Then, export and import the site into each Kentico Project and link with the same database connection string.
But what if one of the webparts (.ascx) gets updated? Is that mean I will need to update all 3 Kentico Project. What if other files like js, css, or media?
Is there a proper way to host on different servers but yet can manage the content as one of the Kentico Project get update?
What you are describing is the exact purpose of Kentico's Web farm feature where you can have multiple servers (web farms) connected to a single database. The main purpose of web farms is to ensure that cache and files (not code files, but media files such as the ones uploaded by you as attachments, media library, meta files...) are synchronized across all servers.
Each server in your scenario has its own memory and if you change an object, you want all other servers to reflect the change because otherwise some visitors might end up seeing "old" data, while others wouldn't.
You are also correct in assumption that all code files (ascx, cs, aspx...) will need to be uploaded to all servers. Best way to approach this is to have a tool such as Team city which is able to deploy your changes to multiple servers simultaneously.
With js, css, html, images... it depends where you store them. If you store them in database (not usually the best thing to do) you don't need to update them on particular servers, but if you store them on file system, you might need to. There are many variables here, but some deployment tool will probably be the best bet.
One note here. Try not to install Kentico directly on each of those server and use Export and Import to setup the site. Simply make a copy of the website physically files from your DEV server and paste into each of those server. Then connect them all to the same database.
Why not use the Export and Import? 1. You will get different hast salt string in the web.config which you will get Macro security error, which you will have to replace with the same key. 2. You may miss objects during export and import. 3. The export and import are mostly for the objects stored in the data base, and for the web farm setup, they share the same database, so there is no point of doing that.
You can easily achieve this move to windows Azure from on-premises.
--Can deploy your website/ web project as Cloud service/App service.
--Kentico Azure supports both development and deployment solution
--Built-in scalability
For more details refer below links
Hosting options: https://docs.kentico.com/k10/running-kentico-on-microsoft-azure/microsoft-azure-web-hosting-options
https://devnet.kentico.com/articles/deploying-kentico-to-microsoft-azure-know-your-web-hosting-options
Related
I have big dilemma and I need help.
Basically we have sitecore web app this is our main web service. Currently my app is working with the main app via .html static pages(it works as SPA, JS calls backend with needed html content).
But database I work with grows bigger, and to access certain elements with URL I need to create ~70.000+ static files. As well this static files are needed for google indexing, so we can advertise our products. In case if there is new meta data needed or new item added, I need to run my other program that creates this static files to update everything out of txt file with all items. And we have 2 reserve servers where our sitecore web is. So it like 70k+ files for 9 languages and 3 web servers. It takes a day to recreate everything...
That why I decided to make clear MVC SPA application, and it works great. But...
I can't add my MVC application or anything except .html files to the current sitecore main app.
And the question is: how it could be done without losing google indexing and without changing main domain.
For example we have now:
www.ourdomain.com/foldername/mystaticfile.html
What I want:
www.ourdomain.com/mynewmvcapplication
Sitecore has a settings called IgnoreUrlPrefixes. You can add mynewmvcapplication to this setting, in that case Sitecore will ignore that path as well as anything under it. Here is a good article which shows you how to update this setting without making an update to Sitecore's config files.
Take a look at Sitecore Redirect Manager Sitecore market place. This it has the capabilities to create your custom url and keeps your search engine rating.
https://marketplace.sitecore.net/en/Modules/Sitecore_Redirect_Manager.aspx
Otherwise you can check Custom Link Provider and Custome Item Resolver. This will need more coding than the previous one. A google search with those keywords brings back many results.
Best wishes.
Alright, I am obviously missing something here. I have moved several websites over to Azure to take advantage of all that it has to offer. Traditionally our team has always used DreamWeaver to ftp up/down and such. What I don't understand is how I go about getting hooked up to an EXISTING site on Azure. I can easily setup and web deploy to a NEW site, but I am trying to give the rest of the team access to the sites I have setup and I am lost as to how to approach this.
I have tried the File > Open Web Site route, and the issue with that is it never then saves the project/info anywhere in VS, and we are required to hook back up to it each time.
All of our local sites are on a shared network drive, so we all access the same local resources. I thought I could simply pass them all the publish profiles and they could then import, get, and then edit and publish files... but it never gives the option to "get all files" from the server.
Hope this makes sense?! Thanks in advance! :)
For multiple developer scenarios, it would be in your best interest to use a source control system such as Git or TFS. This will allow you not only to share the source across team members, but also give you the benefit of tracking changes and merging files that are modified across team members.
If you aren't comfortable with source control, you do still have access to the files via FTP or Secure FTP.
You could also use WebMatrix which has the concept of download from server built directly into the tooling.
Is it possible to convert a .nsf Domino Web Application to HTML? I need the application making available offline without the use of a Domino server. To elaborate on this, we have an external company that host a domino application for us, a document management system. They are soon going to pull the plug on the server and have sent us a .nsf file. If we had a domino server it would be great, we could just place the file on the server. But the problem is that we don't. That is why I was hoping if there was a way to extract all the content so that it could run without a domino server, just as a bunch of HTML files, we don't need the functionality of the DMS, we just need to be able to view the content.
Thanks
If it is an application with logic and actions built on Domino's programming framework, and not just a set of static pages, then the answer is no. First of all, because HTML is just a markup language, not a programming language or framework. And secondly, because the various attempts that have been made to build tools to migrate Domino applications to other frameworks have generally not been very successful. GBS has tools to migrate traditional Domino applications to XPages, but that's probably not what you want.
If the site is static you could copy it using a web site copy tool like HTTrack: http://www.httrack.com/
The tool crawls the entire site and generates HTML pages.
Using the Notes client, create a local replica of the database. With that database open in Notes, click on Actions in the top-line menu, then Preview in Web Browser, and choose Internet Explorer. You may need to change the ACL to allow Anonymous to have Reader access. If the data needs to be secure, create a local copy instead so that you can modify the ACL without putting the production copy at risk.
You can download the Notes designer client from IBM with no restrictions as well as the Notes and administrator clients with a 90-day evaluation period.
I'm creating a custom master page for my SharePoint 2010 publishing site. There are images, css files and js files associated with this custom master page. Where should they be stored?
I'm using the SiteAssets library for now - is this a good choice?
Thanks.
Yeah that is a good choice, also make sure you Provision all these files using Feature, this way upate of Files becomes easier.
In my opinion, you should store everything under the site collection libraries, this way you get:
Easy recovery in the cases you need to re-install the server[s]
Versioning and permissions on resources
Separation of resources between site collection
Simple deployment between environments, as you do not need to copy the files manually or design and deploy a feature to do it for you
The preferred place is of course Style Library, this is what it is intended for.
If you are creating and deploying your files through code, you can also use the _layouts directory to store your files. This makes it simpler to share files between site collections. Visual Studio 2010 makes it really simple to add a reference to the Images folder and any files will then be deployed to the _layouts/Images URL.
The only advantage of this is that a site collection administrator cannot make changes to these files, only someone with access to the physical server. (Although this can also be a disadvantage if your logos or images are changing regularly).
I usually store them in _catalogs/masterpage/ORGNAME/...
You can refer this blog for actual implementation
http://markviky.blogspot.com/2010/11/sharepoint-2010-web-content-management.html
-Vighnesh Bendre
My team is working on a project to migrate a .com site into SharePoint.
After all our look and feel assets, master pages, content types, and page layouts are created, we need to actually "move" the actual site pages into SharePoint.
I'm trying to come up with the most effective way to do this. Our topology consists of an Authoring and a Production environment. We plan to use SharePoint Content Deployment to populate Production from Authoring.
However, we obviously need to do some sort of initial population of the Authoring environment. I don't want to use Content Deployment to populate Authoring from a development environment because I don't want to initially create Authoring from a Blank Site definition.
Here are the options I came up with, would love some feedback on which you think would be the best approach:
Create the site content in a development environment and use a tool such as SPDeploy to migrate it into the Authoring environment
Create the content directly in the Authoring environment
Use a technique similar to how you can provision List Item instances in a feature. We would create and populate all of our content using Features
I'm not sure if this is actually doable, but got the idea because of how I know you can create List Item instances when provisioning a List in a feature. After all, our Pages library is a list of Pages - however there are multiple content types involved.
Thank you for your suggestions!
If it is just a matter of migrating files, you could actually use the content migration framework. The core classes of this framework are the SPExport and SPImport classes in the Microsoft.SharePoint.Deployment namespace. You can with fairly little code export individual files to disk and import them again to a new location. Alternatively, try the SharePoint Content Deployment Wizard on CodePlex here: http://www.codeplex.com/SPDeploymentWizard. It will save you the coding.
Backup and restore the content DB.
Can you clarify on why you don't want to use content deployment to create your initial Authoring site? Why do you not want to start with a blank site definition? It would get overwritten in the deployment process anyway. What about stsadm -export / -import?
I'm sorry, but I'm still not clear on the whole situation. You have a development environment (presumably where structure is created, but not any content destined for production), an authoring environment (which I understand as a locked down environment where content is entered and approved), and then a read-only production environment to which approved items are deployed. If this is the case, then I can say that I have a similar setup on one of my projects.
In my case, I initially developed the site structure in my dev environment, then backed up and restored to authoring and prod. Subsequent structural changes to both environments are made by hand. Authoring is structurally almost exactly the same as prod. Only the security is different. Several times per day content is deployed from authoring to prod. We make content changes directly in the authoring environment.