[FX.php List] Two Servers and FX

[Dale Bengston]

Thanks, Kevin. Since my post took 2+ days to reach the forum, I've  
come to most of the same conclusions in the mean time. I appreciate  
the reality check!

Regards,
Dale

On Jul 5, 2006, at 11:17 PM, Kevin Futter wrote:

> On 4/7/06 8:20 AM, "Dale Bengston"  
> <dbengston at preservationstudio.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I have a less-than-ideal client scenario involving an FMUv6 server
>> (OS X) in one location and a more public web server (Linux) in
>> another. I am seeking advice on how to best split up my site code. It
>> seems to me that FX.PHP should be on the FMU box, and the other site
>> files that refer to it should be on the public web box, but I can't
>> get my brain around how to do the including and server IP stuff from
>> one to the other.
>
> I would actually put the FX files on the public web server, as that  
> way you
> don't have to worry about whether the FMU box has suitable/working  
> webserver
> or not. Besides, FMU6 is not particularly efficient, so asking the  
> same box
> to handle FX as well might better be avoided.
>
>>
>> Here are my assumptions about having FX on the FMU machine as opposed
>> to having FX on the web server...
>>
>> -Less network traffic/latency since FX would be making calls locally
>> to FMU.
>> -I can restrict FMU to only accept traffic from its own IP address.
>
> You can also restrict it to only accepting requests from the public  
> web
> server's IP, or an internal firewall/gateway if one is in play.
>
>>
>> I think my brain is on vacation today, as I can't figure out how to
>> best implement this. I'd appreciate any advice, or reasons why I
>> should have FX on the web server instead.
>
> I think from an IA point-of-view, you should try to treat FMU as a  
> simple
> application server or data server. Leave the web smarts to the box  
> designed
> to do it. I haven't had to do what you're doing since we left CDML  
> behind,
> but basically FM sat behind our firewall and the public web server  
> made
> calls to our public IP address, which were then routed by our  
> gateway to the
> internal FMU box. It all worked pretty well, apart from the really  
> ugly
> URLs, and of course CDML required us to serve *web pages* from the  
> FMU box,
> rather than simply db data. Essentially, I think you'd be forced to  
> do the
> same with FX using that model. I can't see how you could do it any  
> other way
> to be honest.
>
> -- 
> Kevin Futter
> Webmaster, St. Bernard's College
> http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.au/
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------
> This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential.  You must not  
> disclose or use the information in this e-mail if you are not the  
> intended recipient.  If you have received this e-mail in error,  
> please notify us immediately and delete the e-mail and all copies.   
> The College does not guarantee that this e-mail is virus or error  
> free.  The attached files are provided and may only be used on the  
> basis that the user assumes all responsibility for any loss, damage  
> or consequence resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the  
> attached files, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or  
> not.  The content and opinions in this e-mail are not necessarily  
> those of the College.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list