Jim Lawrence
accessd at shaw.ca
Sat Jul 14 13:10:32 CDT 2012
Hi Gustav/Shamil: There are none. It is running off a friend's servers and I am allowed everything I would like... We have IIS but may be going for the Ingnx server just for speed. I think we have MS SQL server 8. I would like to do something with the DNN FE as it is the ultimate resource pig. Get a few hundred instances going and you can bring any server and database to its knees as there is no other package that does more round trips. My experiences with NDD have been fairly frustrating. This same friend updated his version of NDD and SQL version and all his websites shut-down. It took us over a month to get the site running again after I had deleted thousand of lines of what I thought were convoluted useless code...classes calling classes calling classes (I.e. 758 lines with resource files, were replaced with 8 lines of code). That type of job should have taken an afternoon to get it working, tops. It stores everything in the database! The site is still has little issues and needs another week or two to completely clean up but the pages loads in a tenth of the time and now it run rock-solid. That said maybe NDD should be used to get a demonstration package boiler-plated together and up and running. Jim -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Gustav Brock Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 7:51 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] Where to publish stuff Hi Shamil To me that certainly looks like a route to follow. And why abandon DNN because it runs on Microsoft software? That would not be logical to me. But what about hosting costs? We have very little resources, and I would prefer not to be bothered with adds. /gustav >>> mcp2004 at mail.ru 14-07-12 11:55 >>> Hi Arthur and Stuart -- Here is a test DNN setup I have made for you and All to try it: http://shamils-42.hosting.parking.ru/GettingStarted.aspx FYI: Setup took less than half an hour, that was a Typical setup. *It's not that I'm doing DNN setups every day - last one I did several months ago for DNN v.5.4.x Website is running on parking.ru shared virtual host with shared SQL Server having many other hosting users databases - that's a typical ASP.NET hosting you can find everywhere nowadays; You can find test web site to be a bit slow at start-up but when used constantly, without ASP.NET engine putting web site in a sleep mode because of its inactivity, then DNN web sites with proper skins fly. I suppose that if the goal of making DatabaseAdvisors *group more "populated" and popular then using MS web platforms/tools based web site engine is*preferable*- it's just illogical IMO to use other platforms. There are several ASP.NET CMS - here is the list: http://www.codeplex.com/site/search?query=cms&stableOnly=true&sortBy=Relevan ce&licenses=|&ac=8 As I have already noted using DNN in the current DatabaseAdvisors group context could be preferable IMO as it's: - widely used and has very active community; - inexpensive; - not time consuming to setup and to support; - open for extensions; - mobile platforms friendly(?); - ... Thank you. -- Shamil P.S. I didn't configure sample web site to have proper e-mail accounts - you can register but you'll not get any notification e-mails. Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:25:43 -0400 от Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful at gmail.com>: I agree, Stuart. Any of these platforms would be preferable to having MS sink her teeth even further into us, even though this thread is mainly about MS products. On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Stuart McLachlan <stuart at lexacorp.com.pg>wrote: > If we did go over to new site format, I'd opt for a paltform independent > CMS such as Joomla, > Drupal, Concrete5,Wordpress etc rather than Windows DotnetNuke. > > -- > Stuart -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com