I am trying to build a CMS I can use to host multiple sites. I know I'm going to end up reinventing the wheel a million times with this project, so I'm thinking about extending an existing open source Ruby on Rails CMS to meet my needs.
One of those needs is to be able to run multiple sites, while using only one code-base. That way, when there's an update I want to make, I can update it in one place, and the change is reflected on all of the sites. I think that this will be able to scale by running multiple instances of the application.
I think that I can use the domain/subdomain to determine which data to display. For example, someone goes to subdomain1.mysite.com and the application looks in the database for the content for subdomain1.
The problem I see is with most pre-built CMS solutions, they are only designed to host one site, including the one I want to use. So the database is structured to work with one site. However, I had the idea that I could overcome this by "creating a new database" for each site, then specifying which database to connect to based on the domain/subdomain as I mentioned above.
I'm thinking of hosting this on Heroku, so I'm wondering what my options for this might be. I'm not very familiar with Amazon S3, or Amazon SimpleDB, but I feel like there's some sort of "cloud database" that would make this solution a lot more realistic, than creating a new MySQL database for each site.
What do you think? Am I thinking about this the wrong way? What advice do you have to offer in this area?
I've worked on a Rails app like this, and the way it was done there was named-based virtual hosts, with db entries for each site running. Each record was scoped to a site if necessary (blog posts, etc.) while users would have access to all sites running out of that db. Administrator permissions could be global or scoped to one or more sites.
You're absolutely correct when you say you'll reinvent the wheel a million times during the project. Plugins will likely require hacking on top of the CMS itself.
In my situation, it ended up being a waste of almost a million dollars of company money to build that codebase to run multiple sites while still being able to cater to the whims of each client site. It worked, but was not very maintainable due to the number of site-specific hacks that subsequently entered the codebase. You may be able to make it work if you don't have to worry about catering to specific client sites running on your platform.
In the end, you're going to need a layer of indirection to handle the different sites regardless of methodology. We ended up putting it in the database itself. If you go with the different-db-for-each-site method you mentioned, you'll put that layer in your code instead. I'm not sure which one is the better method.
I hope you're able to pull this off. I failed.
Also, as I learned today, Heroku offers postgres instead of mysql for rails apps.
There's James Stewart's Theme Support Plugin for Rails 2.3, and lucasefe's themes_for_rails gem for Rails 3+.
I just started using the 2.3 version and it's working well so far.
Related
My friend has setting up a database for a Ragnarok Online server, and he wants me to code the relative website, which is going to use some of that data (and obviously, i'll have to add tables for the news system, website accounts, etc). Since i'm learning RoR i was going to do it that way.
I have a few "best practice" questions related to this :
Should I create a different database for the website, since it's going to have its particular data alongside the game data ? (i already have a few clues to link multiple databases with Rails, but that seems too much of a hassle for what it is).
If not, do i have to create Model/Controller for each of the tables composing the database, despite the fact that i'm not going to use 90% of it ? Or just the ones that i need ?
An example of this problem : the game database has its own "user" table, but i have to have another "user" table for the website, and do some Joins between those two. So, what's the best practice here ?
Uhm, best practice is not making your own user table. This will cause you much pain. Best practice? Use an API. Expose the game's database in some way to your website, and fetch that info with external requests in your web application.
The reason why making a second user table is a hassle:
1) You'll constantly have to update it, pulling data from the original
to keep it up-to-date.
And I mean furthermore, you're gonna have to create a CRON job or something pulling data from that original table to keep it up to date. Yuck. Also what if that CRON job makes a mistake? (It will)
2) It's almost inevitable that there will be inconsistencies if two
separate tables are maintained. Are you sure your web application is
really fail-proof?
Update:
What you're gonna need is essentially a second Rails application that acts as a REST API for that database. For a good idea of what REST is, I'd read through this to get you started: http://tomayko.com/writings/rest-to-my-wife
Once you have a good understanding of that, start making your app, and test if it's working by using tools like cURL to send requests to your API.
Once you have that done, I'd take a look into the Ruby rest-client gem like Nobita mentioned. This is what you're going to use from your web application to request information from your API application.
Just let me note, I think this would be a terrible first Rails project, unless you're already really well versed in other web development tools, preferably MVC frameworks.
So, this may be a kind of dumb question, but I checked the Google and got no hits. We want to host multiple Rails apps in a way that makes them look homogeneous. We want all the apps to have the same look and feel, and all the apps to use the same sign-on database.
Theming I think we could accomplish by just putting the site theme into a gem, and requiring that gem from our github repository in each app. However, auth is trickier.
I know that I can achieve this "for free" by just not making the different portions of the site (store, chat forums, etc.) different apps. If they're all, say, Rails Engines, we can basically drop them into the same application with their own namespaced routes, and have a single plugin that does auth.
However, for various reasons we'd like to keep these separate apps, if that's technically possible. The number one reason is scalability; since this will be a hosted site, we want the flexibility to spin up more instances of, say, the store (perhaps to handle a holiday sale rush), without needing to spin up the chat forums. Also, we want to be able to completely isolate the portions of the code that AREN'T intertwined.
Ideally, the databases would be separate too (keeping us from falling back into the rut of "put everything including the kitchen sink in the db"), but I do know that one "cheap" way to do cross-app auth is just to use the same plugin (say, Devise), and just point to the same DB.
So, I'm thinking that maybe the way to do this is to auth via a web service call. Is this prior art -- does anyone have a gem for this that "just works" so that authentication can be shared across all apps? Or am I just entering into a world of pain by trying to build things this way?
Thanks in advance!
You could do a single sign on approach described at:
http://blog.joshsoftware.com/2010/12/16/multiple-applications-with-devise-omniauth-and-single-sign-on/
The single sign on approach with oauth and devise has some drawbacks. The main problem I had was I was unable to extend the timeout time across multiple apps.
I am beginning work on a new Rails project that is based on the premise of allowing users to create their own "sites." Each "site" would be a subdomain of the root domain (we'll use example.com). So if user Foo wants to create his own site at bar.example.com, each page request to a bar.example.com page would require fetching the a row in a sites table based on the subdomain.
My question is not how to code a multisite app, I think I have a pretty good grasp on that. My question is, from a scalability and performance perspective, would it be better to simply generate a new rails project for each site a user creates? Or is it ok run all sites out of one rails app. If numbers are necessary, let's assume I have 1 million users, each with a maximum of 5 sites, with each site bringing in around 1,000 hits a day.
I realize this is kind of a broad question, and mostly depends on my implementation of either method to reach a feasible solution, but any suggestions in terms of the best way to write this, including optimizing the DB, etc. would be appreciated.
It would be exponentially easier to have 1 rails app with millions of subdomains compared to millions of rails apps.
Check out this railscast for how to start with subdomains: http://railscasts.com/episodes/221-subdomains-in-rails-3
I wouldn't ever consider doing something like this with multiple Rails projects, because of the need to maintain all the code. By keeping it centralized, you can change the functionality of everybody's sites at once.
I think you might also run into memory issues by having all of those copies of Rails instantiated, too.
#Solomon is right. Heroku.com is using same concept for it's users to demonstrate users' applications.
I was wondering if somebody has some insight on this issue.
A little background:
We've been using Rails to migrate from an old dBase and Visual Basic based system
to build internal company IntrAnet that does things like label printing,
invetory control, shipping, etc - basically an ERP
The Dilemma
Right now we need to replace an old customer-facing website that was done in Java, that
would connect to our internal system for our clients to use. We want to be able to pull information like inventory, order placement, account statements from our internal system and expose it to site live. The reason is that we take orders on the website, through fax & phone and sometimes we have walk-ins. So sometimes (very rarely thou) even a short delay in inventory update on our old Java site causes us to put an order on backorder, because we sell the same item to 2 customers within half an hour. It's usually fixed within one day but we want to avoid this in the future.
Actual Question
Does anyone have any suggestion on how to accomplish this in a better
way?
Here are three options that I see:
a) Build a separate Rails app on a web server, that will connect to the same DB that our internal app connects to.
+++ Pluses:Live data - same thing that our internal apps see, i.e. orders are created in real time, inventory is depleted right away
--- Minuses: Potential security risk, duplication of code - i.e. I need to duplicate all the controllers, models, views, etc. that deal with orders.
b) Build a separate Rails app on a web server, that will connect to a different DB from our internal app.
+++ Pluses: Less security exposure.
--- Minuses:Extra effort to sync web DB and internal DB (or using a web service like REST-API), extra code to handle inventory depletion and order # creation, duplication of code - i.e. I need to duplicate all the controllers, models, views, etc. that deal with orders.
c) Expose internal app to the web
+++ Pluses: all the problems from above eliminated. This is much "DRY"er method.
--- Minuses: A lot more security headaches. More complicated login systems - one for web & one for internal users using LDAP.
So any thoughts? Anyone had similar problem to solve? Please keep in mind that our company has limited resources - namely one developer that is dedicated to this. So this has to be one of those "right" and "smart" solutions, not "throw money/people/resources at this" solutions.
Thank you.
I would probably create separate controllers for the public site and use ActiveResource to pull data from you internal application. Take a look at
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/posts/gregory/rails_modularity_1.html
http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveResource/Base.html
Edit - fixed link and added api link
I would go for a. You should be able to create the controllers so that they are re-usable.
Internal users are as likely to duplicate data as external users.
It's likely that a public UI and an internal, for-the-staff, UI will need to be different. The data needs to be consistent so I would put quite a bit of effort into ensuring that there is exactly one, definitive database. So: one database two UIs?
Have a "service" layer that both UIs can use. If this was Java I would be pretty confident of getting the services done quickly. I wonder how easy it is in Ruby/Rails.
The best outcome would be that your existing Customer Java UI can be adapted to use the Rails service layer.
Assuming you trust your programmers to not accidentally expose things in the wrong place, the 'right' solution seems to me to have a single application, but two different sets of controllers and views, one for internal use, and one for public-facing. This will give you djna's idea of one database, two UIs.
As you say having two separate databases is going to involve a lot of duplication, as well as the problem of replication.
It doesn't make sense to me to have two totally separate apps using the same database; the ActiveRecord part of a Rails app is an abstraction of the database in Ruby code, therefore having two abstractions for a single database seems a bit wrong.
You can also then have common business rules in your models, to avoid code duplication across the two versions of the site.
If you don't completely trust your programmers, then Mike's ActiveResource approach is pretty good - it would make it a lot harder to expose things by accident (although ActiveResource is a lot less flexible and feature rich than ActiveRecord)
What version of Rails are you using? Since version 2.3 Rails Engines is included, this allows to share common code (models/views/controllers) in a Rails plugin.
See the Railscast for a short introduction.
I use it too. I have developed three applications for different clients, but with all the shared code in a plugin.
It's an application that we use internally at the office that I would like to offer as a hosted service for anyone.
How can I do that without making major code changes?
The first thing that occurs to me is to have the app select which database to connect to based on the domain.
So each instance of the app would have its own database, but all instances would share the same code.
The only changes required to the code would be the database selection.
Is this approach maintainable? I've heard wordpress.com does this and that it offers a couple of advantages. I'm mainly looking to do it this way to avoid have to scope my entire set of database queries to a certain site within the same database.
Thanks!
The simplest way to do this is to clone the application, and create another server instance to handle it. This actually the way I handle multiple wordpress blogs on my server
Pro:
This process can be streamlined into a utility script.
Can be easily maintained if symlinks are used for the common code. IE: Everything but branding and some of the things in the config directory.
Cons:
- If you're using passenger it will require an apache restart for each new instance.
- Same if you're using Apache to route subdomains on different virtual hosts to different mongrel clusters.
However the better way comes from the question: Rails - Separate Database Per Subdomain
The method in the accepted answer is much more robust. It might require more changes than you're looking for, but it has all the benefits without the drawbacks of any other methods. Each new instance requires a new entry in the master database with the table name and other instance specific information. You'll also want custom rake task to build the database for each new instance.
I would suggest switching the database connection and adding a view_path based on the domain, I have posted code in this question.
I hope this helps!
I wouldn't do this with multiple databases as you mentioned. Keeping all your schemas/migrations in sync with all the db's could become painful.
I would look into simply making it a multi-tenant app where you have some sort of "Account" model and then all your existing models are scoped to it ... in other words, if this was a blog app, your Account has_many :posts, etc.
With this approach, you can identify accounts by subdomain ... have people choose their subdomain when they create an account and go from there.
It's pretty straightforward to do. If you need add billing into the mix, you might look at the SaaS Railskit (which handles all the signup and subdomain stuff) or Chargify.
You can also identify accounts Twitter-style ... with http://myapp.com/someuser