Need some advice before starting develop some things.. I've 15 WordPress websites on different installs, and I've remote server which gets data 24/7 from those websites.
I've reached a point that I want the server to modify the websites based on his calculated data.
The things are this:
Should I allow the server the access the WP DB remotely and modify things without using WP on the circle?
Or, use WP REST API and supply some secured routes which provide data and accept data and make those changes?
My instinct is to use the WP API, but. After all its a PHP (nginx+apache) which have some limits (timeout for example) and I find it hard to run hard and long process on the WP itself.
I can divide the tasks to different levels, for example:
fetching data (simple get)
make some process on the remote server
loop and modify in small batches to another route
My concerns are that this circle require perfect match between remote server and WP API, and any change or fix on WP side brings plugins update on the websites which is not much fun.
Hope for any ideas and suggests to make it forward.
"use WP REST API and supply some secured routes which provide data and accept data and make those changes", indeed.
i don't know why timeout or another limits may cause a problem - but using API is the best way for such kind of cases. You can avoid timeout problems with some adjustments on web servers side.
Or you can increase memory, timeout limit exclusively for requested server.
f.e.
if ($_SERVER["remote_attr"]=='YOUR_MAIN_SERVER_IP') {
ini_set('max_execution_time',1000);
ini_set('memory_limit','1024M');
}
Related
I am looking for as reliable and accurate / quick means possible to add in some htaccess code to block visits to a website from countries / IPs which are not in the white listed list of countries I want to allow access for. I have looked at https://www.ip2location.com/free/visitor-blocker which seems to offer a solution - for the 4 allowed countries I want to allow access - it has created a 4.1MB htaccess file! Will this mean slow access when someone attempts to view the site? I guess using a free service like this means the data is likely nowhere near comprehensive?
Does anyone have any suggestions on a good way to allow just visitors from a few countries access to a website?
It sounds like the service you used basically tried tried to brute force the blacklist. If you look into the htaccess file I'm sure you will be a long list of hard coded IP blocks.
In my opinion this is a terrible way to handle a geographic blacklist. To your original question - there is no "most reliable, most accurate, and quickest" method. Those are separate categories and you will need to preference one over the next.
For performance you could consider blacklisting at the routing level / dns server / proxy. This obviously isn't going to be the quickest way in terms of performance. There are Apache Modules that exist that allow you to use a local database to compare the incoming IP address with a list of known IP blocks from the blacklisted country. One of the main issues with this is that you need to constantly update your database to take in new IP blocks.
In my opinion the "best" method to do this is a simple redirect at the application layer using server side code. There exists several geographic API's where you can send in the IP or Hostname and get back a country of origin. An example:
$xml= new SimpleXMLElement(file_get_contents('http://www.freegeoip.net/xml/{IP_or_hostname}'));
if($xml->CountryCode == "US") {
header('Location: http://www.google.com');
}
There are two ways to block a visitor in web server. One is using firewall (.htaccess etc) and another one is using server-side scripting (PHP etc).
If you are concern of the performance of the firewall option, then you can download the IP2Location LITE database from http://lite.ip2location.com and implement the database in your local server. For every connection, you query the visitor IP address and find their country. You can redirect or block them using the PHP codes. Please find the complete steps in https://www.ip2location.com/tutorials/redirect-web-visitors-by-country-using-php-and-mysql-database
There is also another option to use remote geolocation API. However, we do not suggest this method because of network latency. It will slow down all user experience due to API queries.
We have a plugin for Wordpress that we've been using successfully on many customers- the plugin syncs stock numbers with our warehouse and exports orders to our warehouse.
We have recently had a client move to WP-Engine who seem to impose a hard 30 second limit on the length of a running request. Because sometimes we have many orders to export, the script simply hits a 502 bad gateway error.
According to WP-Engine documentation, this cannot be turned off on a client by client basis.
https://wpengine.com/support/troubleshooting-502-error/
My question is, what options do I have to get around a host's 30 second timeout limit? Setting set_time_limit has no effect (as expected as it is the web server killing the request, not PHP). The only thing I can think of is make heavy modifications to the plugin whereby it acts as an API and we simply pull the data from the clients system, however this is a last resort.
The long-process timeout is 60 seconds.
This cannot be turned off on shared plans, only plans with dedicated servers. You will not be able to get around this by attempting to modify it as it runs directly on Apache outside of your particular install
Your optons are:
1. 'Chunk' the upload to be smaller
2. Upload the sql file to your sFTP _wpeprivate folder and have their support import it for you.
3. Optimize the import so the content is imported more efficiently.
I can see three options here.
Change the web host (easy option).
Modify a plugin to process the sync in batches. However, this also won't give you a 100% guarantee with a hard script execution time limit - something may get lost in one or more batches and you won't even know.
Contact WP Engine and ask to raise the limit for this particular client.
I'm going to run WordPress site in HA(High Availability) environment at AWS.
I already use HA MySQL - Amazon Avrora.
Right now I have a few question:
Should I prefer Session Replication or Sticky sessions or at my Load Balancer or both of them ?
User content must be uploaded to CDN and not to WP single node in cluster?
How AWS can help with WordPress HA setup ? For example should I use AWS Beanstalk for this purpose ?
What else should I pay my attention to in order to create HA for WordPress ?
Your questions are perhaps a bit broad for StackOverflow, but I am in your situation so I can sympathize.
Sticky sessions are not the preferred option because the need to use them would suggest that your application is not stateless.
In other words, you are requiring sticky sessions, that means your application relies on server memory for session management so, once a session is initialized, that user must stay on THAT server for the entire duration of the session. This is OK, but less desirable (compared to if your request didn't care at all which server instance it was running on) because if your traffic slowed down and Elastic Beanstalk decided to kill off the instance you were on, then on the next request when the load balancer routed you to another instance, your session would be RESET and your user would have to login again.
On the other hand, if your app was written to be completely stateless (by storing the state in a db instance for example), then you would not care which server each request hit because state would not be stored on the server instance. This would allow Beanstalk to freely spin up and down instances without affecting your users in any way.
The benefit to sticky sessions is, if your app is already written with a dependence on server memory, or MUST have it for some reason, it allow your app to run without code changes.
Yes, it seems to me like your user-content should not be uploaded to any single node (for mainly the same reasons I mentioned above). If your user-content is stored on the node and that node gets spun down due to low traffic, you will have lost that data.
This is where something like S3 comes in handy. Your application interacts directly with S3 as its storage solution and each instance saves content to your S3 bucket(s). Then, regardless of which node is running, it can just talk to the same S3 bucket and get the data it needs.
Aside from that, all I can recommend is that you experiment, look into load testing, and adjust as needed.
I'm searching for a way to change the way Meteor loads the Mongo database. Right now, I know I can set an environment variable when I launch Meteor (or export it), but I was hoping there was a way to do this in code. This way, I could dynamically connect to different instances based on conditions.
An example test case would be for the code to parse the url 'testxx.site.com' and then look up a URL based on the 'textxx' subdomain and then connect to that particular instance.
I've tried setting the process.env.MONGO_URL in the server code, but when things execute on the client, it's not picking up the new values.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Meteor connects to Mongo right when it starts (using this code), so any changes to process.env.MONGO_URL won't affect the database connection.
It sounds like you are trying to run one Meteor server on several domains and have it connect to several databases at the same time depending on the client's request. This might be possible with traditional server-side scripting languages, but it's not possible with Meteor because the server and database are pretty tightly tied together, and the server basically attaches to one main database when it starts up.
The *.meteor.com hosting is doing something similar to this right now, and in the future Meteor's Galaxy commercial product will allow you to do this - all by starting up separate Meteor servers per subdomain.
Hi, We are developing a multi-tenant application in Asp.Net with separate Database for each tenant, in which one of the requirement is to monitor the bandwidth usage for each tenant,
i have tried to search but not found much help on the topic,we want to monitor exactly how much bandwidth is being used for each tenant while each tenant can have its own top level domain or a sub domain or a combination of both.
so what are the available options, the ones which i can think of can be
IIS Log Monitoring means a separate application which will calculate the bandwidth for each tenant.
Log Each Request and Response for a tenant from within the application and then calculate the total bandwidth usage based on that.
Use some third part components if available
So what do you think will be the best approach, also if there is any other way to do this.
Ok, here is an idea (that I have not test, leave that to you)
On global.asax
use one of this function (find the one that have a valid final size)
Application_PostRequestHandlerExecute
Application_ReleaseRequestState
and get the size that you have send with
Response.Filter.Length
No need to metion, that you get the filename of the call using the
HttpContext.Current.Request.Path
This functions called with every single request, so you can get your size and you do the rest.
Here must note, that you need first to test this idea to see if its work, and maybe improve it, and have in mine that if you have compress the pages on server the length is not the correct and maybe you need to compress it on Global.asax to have the actually lenght.
Hope this help.
Well, since the IIS logs already contain the request size and response size, it doesn't seem like too much trouble to develop a small tool to parse them and calculate the total per day/week/month/whatever.
Trying to segment traffic based on host is difficult in my experience. Instead, if you give each tenant their own IP(s) for the applications you should be able to find programs that will monitor bandwidth based on IP.
ADDITION Is the structure of IIS that you have one website to rule them all for all tenants and on login the system forks to the proper database? If so, this may create problems with respect to versioning in that all tenant's sites will all have to have exactly the same schema and would all need to be updated simultaneously when you update the application such that a schema change is required.
Another structure, which sounds like what you may have, is that each tenant has their own website like so:
tenant1_site/appvirtualdir
tenant2_site/appvirtualdir
...
Where the appvirtualdir points to the same physical path for all tenant's sites. When all clients have the same application version, they are all using literally the same code. If you have this scenario and some sort of authentication, then you will need one IP per tenant anyway because of SSL. SSL will only bind to IP and port unlike non-SSL which will bind to IP, port and host. If that were the case, then monitoring traffic based on IP will still be simpler and more accurate as it could be done at the router or via a network monitor.