[IMC-Video] high-traffic etc.
anna at octapod.org
Wed Nov 21 03:14:06 PST 2007
FYI Plone has been used to date for some very high-traffic sites.
Here's some lists courtesy of google:
(finalists listed in comments)
http://plone.net/sites (erghhh... the C.I.A. is on the list!!! bloody
GPL, anybody can use it ;) now there's an argument for proprietary software)
We use Squid for caching of EngageMedia.org. Can't tell you much more
than that, our programmers could. Plone is nonetheless taxing on a
server, it's true. We've made some big performance improvements on
Plumi, and will be making one more major improvement before the next
Good thing to keep in mind though, and important area for development no
matter which CMS is used.
ourmedia.org runs Drupal, no? fairly comparable to video.indymedia
traffic I would have thought... could be wrong, just an assumption I am
I don't personally see the need for 2 video.indymedia projects - one for
FTP and one for the "video-sharing experience", I think a good system
can do both. Plumi is designed for web-viewing *and* download of videos
for screening. Sorry I am probably just misunderstanding here - Schock
did you suggest 2 systems? Or did you just mean we should get IVDN back
up in order to have that content live again, before some kind of
migration is worked out to the new database, whatever that will be? That
seems to make sense to me.
Perhaps rather than migrating, the old database and data could remain as
is, but have the Search function work across both databases.. at least
until there seems to be enough resources around to attempt a migration.
Also, EngageMedia.org is not a sandbox ;) it is a working example of
Plumi, but a real sandbox installation for Indymedia would involve
testing out making customisations such as anonymous posting (which I
would have thought was pretty damn easy to set up - Plone has well
developed Roles and Workflows that would just need a bit of
customisation.. here's a HowTo
More information about the imc-video