Copied to clipboard

Flag this post as spam?

This post will be reported to the moderators as potential spam to be looked at


  • Petr Snobelt 923 posts 1535 karma points
    Sep 03, 2009 @ 15:37
    Petr Snobelt
    0

    Using App_Data instead of data folder

    Hello,

    is there any reason why umbraco use data folder instead of asp.net standard app_data folder?

    App_data folder is prepared on some hostings with write permissions already set, so it will be more easy to deploy umbraco if it uses app_data.

    Also security on app_data folder is better by default, then on data folder.
    http://stackoverflow.com/questions/537930/appdata-web-applications-data-directory-how-secure-is-it

    Should I add it as issue to codeplex?

    Petr

  • Aaron Powell 1708 posts 3046 karma points c-trib
    Sep 04, 2009 @ 12:32
    Aaron Powell
    1

    You can add it but I don't think we'll change this in 4.1, there's an expectation that you will be storing data in the /data/ folder from a developer point of view. Keep in mind that 4.1 is still a minor release, we don't want to do any to how Umbraco operates and how people expect it to operate.

    You can easily move the location of the umbraco.config file via the web.config.

    It'd be likely to be added in 5 though, that's a ground-up rewrite.

  • Petr Snobelt 923 posts 1535 karma points
    Sep 05, 2009 @ 20:06
    Petr Snobelt
    0

    Hi slace, thank you for your reply, but you don't answer my question - "Is there any reason why umbraco use data folder instead of asp.net standard app_data folder?" - It's only historical reason?

    "there's an expectation that you will be storing data in the /data/ folder from a developer point of view" - It's umbraco related expectation? I normally expect data in App_data folder.

     

     

     

  • Aaron Powell 1708 posts 3046 karma points c-trib
    Sep 06, 2009 @ 11:57
    Aaron Powell
    0

    Hmmm yes I didn't answer the question. I'll admit that I don't know the reason why, but you'd be right in guessing that the reason is historical, as that would be my guess.

    And I did mean that the expectation is an Umbraco one, similarly to that property data is written into the database when you call property.Value, etc. Things like this may not be the normal operation (or expectation) for a .NET application, but due to the evolution of Umbraco it's what we'd expect of Umbraco.

    4.1 we don't want to change expectation as the webforms version of Umbraco should always work that way. The MVC one we may/ can address this though.

    But don't be deterred from adding it to the codeplex issue register, if it is something that everyone wants then we'd not have much choice to address it ;)

  • Niels Hartvig 1951 posts 2391 karma points c-trib
    Sep 06, 2009 @ 14:12
    Niels Hartvig
    0

    I agree that it would be obvious to move data to app_data and I can't see why we shouldn't change the default path in the web.config in new distributions. It's a historical config back from .NET1.1 where app_data didn't exist (it was introduced in .NET2.0) - as such quite different from the immediate persistence which is more of a design flaw ;-)

    So do submit it to Codeplex - I'll vote for it!

  • Petr Snobelt 923 posts 1535 karma points
    Sep 08, 2009 @ 08:49
Please Sign in or register to post replies

Write your reply to:

Draft