[theforum] RFC: w.e.o and l.e.o Server Integration

David Kaufman david at gigawatt.com
Sun May 23 15:15:16 CDT 2004

Dean Mah wrote:
> Topic:
> It seems that no one has an argument against changing the server where
> l.e.o, d.e.o, and b.e.o are currently being hosted to ServerMatrix.

new toys are always easy to sell :-)

> Options:
> 1) Move l.e.o, d.e.o, and b.e.o to a Windows platform to be place with
>    w.e.o which is currently running on Windows with CF/IIS/SQL Server.
> 2) Move w.e.o to a Linux platform which is what l.e.o, d.e.o, and
>    b.e.o currently run on.
> 3) Defer the decision and just move l.e.o, d.e.o, and b.e.o with the
>    intention of re-visiting the issue either through another migration
>    or by going to a distributed computing model.

i had assumed that #3 was implied.  since we do all agree that we can,
should and must, move towards self hosting, and that the leo box was the
low hanging fruit, we were gonna jfda.

i had further assumed that *after* leo, deo and beo (i hate those terms
by the way, they remind me of "huey dewey and louey") were all happily
on servermatrix, we would probably being building a CMS suitable to
replace weo, on the same box and, probably before we could go live with
that new system, the box might need to be either upgraded considerably
or replaced outright with a more powerful model.  but whether we need
two $100/month boxes or one $200/month box just seems to me to be an
implementation detail best left until the system is built and is being
tested.  so i guess that means i perfer #3 with an eventual leaning
toward #2

as far as the #1 option, big thumbs down from me.  a quick googling
shows Windows 2003 going for over $1000 (with ten client licenses, not
sure how/if that relates to internet visitors), ColdFusion costs $1300
and Microsoft SQL Server starts at around $4500.  even if we had the
cash, i think would be a tremendous waste of our donors' money.


More information about the theforum mailing list