My question, however, is what would be best for me to do in terms of hosting/database?
Scenario 1: Use 1 Database and host all these different websites on ONE Umbraco installation (leveraging the hostname functionality) and limiting my customers their access only to the nodes relevant to their sites.
Result: ONE database (mymaindatabase.sdf) and ONE folder that is hosted with all the relevant files. Each domainname points to that folder and that database.
Scenario 2: Use multiple database (one for each website) and multiple folders (one for each website) with all the relevant files. Each domainname points to their specific folder and the database of this specific website.
Result: Dozens of databases (one for each website) and multiple folders with all the files of each website.
Personally, I thought Scenario 1 would be best, as this would simplify everything if I want to add extra functionality on the websites that I've sold or if I want to perform updates / upgrades. However, after browsing to the forums; I've caught 3 possible issues:
1) How can I further develop the functionality of these websites in Visual Studio? Viewing these are live websites, the content continuously changes and uploading the new functionality (and thereby the new database) would overwrite all the content my customers have entered.
2) In counter of the issue pointed out just above, I thought I might just develop these functionalities online via the backoffice, but viewing the backoffice doesn't support all the functionality of MVC, this isn't an option. Or am I mistaking?
3) By using multiple sites in one installation, I'm not sure Google and other search engine robots would parse the sites properly. Does anyone have any experience with this?
In short: What is the best way to manage multiple umbraco installations AND be able to do regular updates or add functionality (eg new document types etc...) for which MVC is needed and without compromising the content that my customers have created in this live environment.
I am running multiple sites per instance of umbraco. I have opted for a maximum of 5 sites per instance as it can get to be a little big of a management head ache, plus that app pools gets pretty big and not too many site will be impacted if you ever have an issue with an instance of Umbraco. So my recommendation is:
1) How can I further develop the functionality of these websites in Visual Studio? Viewing these are live websites, the content continuously changes and uploading the new functionality (and thereby the new database) would overwrite all the content my customers have entered.
I Develop in Visual Studio and then publish locally (site1.umbraco.local). The Dev instance and local instance are pointing to the same DB so all DocumentTypes and what not are automatically synced. When I want to publish a new build, I only need to copy over the /bin and any views/partials/macros created. If there is alot of content change from Production to Dev, then perform a prod db back and restore it to dev. Almost all development I do in umbraco does not touch the DB (views, models, controllers and some custom helper classes).
2) In counter of the issue pointed out just above, I thought I might just develop these functionalities online via the backoffice, but viewing the backoffice doesn't support all the functionality of MVC, this isn't an option. Or am I mistaking?
Yes and no. You can create controller / Models without visual studio, you have to put them in the AppCode folder. No intellisense support and the code is complied at runtime. I do it the standard VS way and then publish my binaries are stated above
3) By using multiple sites in one installation, I'm not sure Google and other search engine robots would parse the sites properly. Does anyone have any experience with this?
I have not had a problems with this as they are URL directed and as long as you have good content, I do not see how this would affect crawling. The search engines are not aware you are running multiple site in 1 instance of Umbraco.
Best practice on managing multiple Umbraco websites
Hi everyone,
I will be selling a variety of websites that are running on Umbraco to multiple customers
Each customer can choose which website he wants and gets a domainname and hosting accordingly, which will result in a scenario like below for example:
- Customer 1: Website A on www.customer1domainname.com
- Customer 2: Website B on www.customer2domainnamecom
- Customer 3: Website A on www.customer3domainname.com
- Customer 4: Website C on www.customer4domainname..com
- Etc..
My question, however, is what would be best for me to do in terms of hosting/database?
Scenario 1: Use 1 Database and host all these different websites on ONE Umbraco installation (leveraging the hostname functionality) and limiting my customers their access only to the nodes relevant to their sites.
Result: ONE database (mymaindatabase.sdf) and ONE folder that is hosted with all the relevant files. Each domainname points to that folder and that database.
Scenario 2: Use multiple database (one for each website) and multiple folders (one for each website) with all the relevant files. Each domainname points to their specific folder and the database of this specific website.
Result: Dozens of databases (one for each website) and multiple folders with all the files of each website.
Personally, I thought Scenario 1 would be best, as this would simplify everything if I want to add extra functionality on the websites that I've sold or if I want to perform updates / upgrades. However, after browsing to the forums; I've caught 3 possible issues:
1) How can I further develop the functionality of these websites in Visual Studio? Viewing these are live websites, the content continuously changes and uploading the new functionality (and thereby the new database) would overwrite all the content my customers have entered.
2) In counter of the issue pointed out just above, I thought I might just develop these functionalities online via the backoffice, but viewing the backoffice doesn't support all the functionality of MVC, this isn't an option. Or am I mistaking?
3) By using multiple sites in one installation, I'm not sure Google and other search engine robots would parse the sites properly. Does anyone have any experience with this?
In short: What is the best way to manage multiple umbraco installations AND be able to do regular updates or add functionality (eg new document types etc...) for which MVC is needed and without compromising the content that my customers have created in this live environment.
All help or documentation would be appreciated!
Manu
Hey Manu.
I am running multiple sites per instance of umbraco. I have opted for a maximum of 5 sites per instance as it can get to be a little big of a management head ache, plus that app pools gets pretty big and not too many site will be impacted if you ever have an issue with an instance of Umbraco. So my recommendation is:
5 sites on 1 umbraco instance and 1 Db instance.
Phillip
I Develop in Visual Studio and then publish locally (site1.umbraco.local). The Dev instance and local instance are pointing to the same DB so all DocumentTypes and what not are automatically synced. When I want to publish a new build, I only need to copy over the /bin and any views/partials/macros created. If there is alot of content change from Production to Dev, then perform a prod db back and restore it to dev. Almost all development I do in umbraco does not touch the DB (views, models, controllers and some custom helper classes).
Yes and no. You can create controller / Models without visual studio, you have to put them in the AppCode folder. No intellisense support and the code is complied at runtime. I do it the standard VS way and then publish my binaries are stated above
I have not had a problems with this as they are URL directed and as long as you have good content, I do not see how this would affect crawling. The search engines are not aware you are running multiple site in 1 instance of Umbraco.
Again, hope this helps.
Phillip
is working on a reply...