Re: New GNOME Website - Plone Deployment

[Jeff Schroeder <jeffschroed gmail com>]

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Jens W. Klein <jens bluedynamics com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Am Wed, 27 May 2009 08:37:35 -0700 schrieb Jeff Schroeder:
>
>> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Lucas Rocha <lucasr gnome org> wrote:
> [...
>>>  http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb/Plone/Deployment
>>
>> This page suggests we use varnish. Try googling "varnish segfault".
>
> We use varnish 2 in production w/o segfaults. Even big sites are using
> varnish in front (plone.org itself, qtsoftware.com too) w7o known
> problems. Varnish 1 was crap, but the latest 2.x series seems fine as far
> as i can tell.
>
>> Personally, I've seen nothing problems with it. Do the plone devs have
>> suggested stable versions of it? It compiles the config file into
>> executable code and loads it. Could we use something novel like Cherokee
>> in its place
>
> I dont know Cherokee. If it is an reverse caching proxy it probably
> possible. But I fear from the Plone-folks theres not much experience with
> it. If it respects the caching headers - like varnish or squid do - it
> will work. I just need to say, it will consume more time for setup with
> anything different from varnish/squid: At least I dont know any reference
> setup for it. Can you point me to introductional docs about it?

Sorry, disregard what I said earlier, we could use squid in place of
varnish. However, if the rest of the team is comfortable using varnish
2 and we find it stable I'm certainly not against it.

>>> So, I ask to sysadmins:
>>> - Do we have enough server resources to run Plone with optimum
>>> performance? If not, how can we solve this? - How feasible it is to
>>> have the test website and the continuous build infra done in the next
>>> 2-3 weeks? In that case, we don't need the ideal server resources yet
>>> as it's just for testing. - Do you need any further information other
>>> than the stuff on the wiki page?
>>
>> Being new to the team, someone with more experience might be able to
>> answer some of the other questions but here are mine.
>>
>> Is python 2.4.5 a hard requirement? This limits where we can run Plone
>> and what distros we might use unless we backport python.
>
> Yes. 2.4.5 is mandatory. I just compiled it without problems on a Debian
> Lenny. I have to say my redhat experience is 10 years old.

If we're going to backport python then don't sweat the redhat stuff.
I've already got some stuff laying around for this.

>> The wiki page says, "Missing: provide a script that checks out the
>> latest code and rebuilds the code and restarts the Plone instance".
>>
>> Can we get links to the plone docs on building from trunk or a "best
>> practices guide" on how they do it? We might learn something clever from
>> their insight and then write the scripts ourselves.
>
> I can help with this. Its simple: update from subversion, re-run
> buildout, stop the zope-server, re-run installsite, start the zope-
> server. This all is for testing only. For the Live-Deployment we dont
> need such a script. All neccessary is be bundled inside the buildout.

Fantastic, thanks for this. I'll try to play with it tomorrow evening
after work.

-- 
Jeff Schroeder

Don't drink and derive, alcohol and analysis don't mix.
http://www.digitalprognosis.com