Re: Best Content Management METHOD...
| From: | Justin French | Date: | Tue, 09 Jul 2002 01:54:11 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Best Content Management METHOD... | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-106206@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
I'm a firm believer in option 1. 750,000 page views per month is only 1
page every 3.4 seconds (ish) on average, so I don't believe you'd see any
server load even in peak periods.
If there IS server load, you can have an option 3, which basically combines
option 1 and 2. Keep the raw article data in a database which is there
forever. Then run a program which batch-creates 'HTML' pages from templates
and the database, and publish a static website (as per option 2).
The difference between option 2 and 3 is that you get to keep all your raw
article data in the database, and when you change your template design, you
can just do a new batch-creation of all the static html pages.
I do this for a client of mine who has got 6 months left on a hosting
contract without MySQL... essentially I do a weekly "build" of a static site
from data and templates stored on my local server, then upload these static
pages.
Cheers,
Justin
on 09/07/02 4:11 AM, Monty (monty3@hotmail.com) wrote:
> I'm setting up a simple content-management system for a webzine. I'm not
> sure which method would be the most efficient:
>
> 1) Put all content in a database and dynamically flow content into a few
> different "article" template files.
>
> Or...
>
> 2) Build the content as actual pages with dynamic elements for menus, and
> store only basic info about each article in CMS database (such as title,
> publish date, writer, keywords, etc.).
>
> Option 1 would make it very easy to modify the look of all articles, but,
> I'm concerned that using just a few templates for all articles would slow
> down the site if lots of people are simultaneously accessing articles. The
> site gets about 750,000 page views per month, so, while it's no Yahoo, it
> does get a decent amount of traffic.
>
> Option 2, on the other hand, would remove the load from just a few templates
> by setting up actual pages for each article, but, it won't be as easy to
> make site-wide design changes this way, and I won't be able to do some
> things like automatically paginating longer articles over several pages.
>
> Anyone have any input or words of wisdom they can offer on the best method
> for setting up a content management system? Thanks!
>
> Monty
>