Content Management Systems

Andrew Reid andrew.reid at plug.cx
Fri Sep 15 13:23:43 CST 2006


On 15/09/2006, at 12:47 PM, Michael Cohen

>> By specifying Microsoft SQL Server you've thrown out most of the open
>> source solutions; they don't work with (crap) closed source database
>> systems.
>
>   The worst problem with SQL server is that it needs to run on  
> windows only so
>   its difficult to develop for portability. It is also expensive so  
> its
>   unlikely that an opensource solution would use it. (If you cant  
> pay big bucks
>   for the CMS how can you pay for SQL Server?). In that respect  
> your statement
>   is correct. Other CMS software might work on SQL server with some  
> tweaking,
>   but most dont bother.

Why can't the CMS be written with a database abstraction layer? To a  
large degree, why should it matter what database server I'm running?

>   The reality is that SQL server is just a program on your PC, you  
> can run
>   mysql and sql server concurrently. This is actually a great idea  
> because CMS
>   are typically very exposed to attackers, and you dont want an SQL  
> injection
>   bug to provide access to all the DBs. Limiting your choice of CMS  
> software by
>   your choice of backend database is odd. A RDBMS is just a program  
> that
>   enables an application, so you should chose your RDBMS to power  
> you CMS.

At the end of the day, I'm as responsible for the data in the CMS as  
I am for any data around the place. I've got quality management tools  
that help me keep that data in good nick and I intend to keep using  
them.

>   MySQL backups are simpler to implement than SQL server anyway,  
> and the
>   administration is also much simpler to do in practice, because  
> its easy to
>   remotely admin mysql and postgres, remotely back them up etc.

The options are either raw, or dump, and I need to train my staff in  
two processes for restoration: restore the dump to a filesystem  
(which, admittedly, they already know how to do) and import it to the  
database.

With SQL Server, it's integrated: my staff can restore granularly at  
any given point in time held in the backup. Data retention policies  
are set by the ILM application, transfer to tape and other media is  
all automated: it makes my job of ensuring policy compliance dead  
easy. I can report on the backup and restore operations of SQL in the  
same interface as I can for my file servers or application servers.

    - andrew

--
| Andrew Reid [mailto:andrew.reid at plug.cx]
| Overworked and Underpaid Network Monkey
| C: +61-401-946-813  F: +61-8-8219-0034





More information about the linuxsa mailing list